►
From YouTube: 2022/08/04 - Backdrop Weekly Dev Meeting
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
A
Hello,
it's
august
4th
2022,
and
this
is
the
weekly
backed
up
developer
meeting.
We
get
together
every
week
to
talk
about
development
activity.
In
the
backdrop
community,
my
name
is
nate
lampton
from
oakland
california,
I'm
quick
sketch
on
the
internet,
and
I
am
a
core
committer
for
the
project.
I'm
joined
here
by
several
of
the
regulars
we'll
do
some
introductions
here.
If
we
could
go
to
tim
and
then
robert.
A
Thanks
tim
robert
and
then
jen.
B
I'm
robert
lyon
club
folder
on
the
internet
coming
to
you
from
altimeter
california,.
C
Ben
lampton
jen
lampton
on
the
internet,
joining
from
oakland
california.
A
Okay,
thanks
justin,
oh,
and
we
have
a
late
joiner,
we're
just
wrapping
up
introductions
herb
if
you,
if
you
want
to
say
your
name
and
where
you're
from
then
then
now's
the
time.
A
Sorry,
we
totally
sprung
that
on
you
literally
joined
right,
the
end
of
introductions.
Okay,
maybe
later
we're
also
joined
by
herb,
herb
dual
on
the
internet,
thanks
for
being
here.
C
A
Okay,
all
right,
let's
see
jen,
do
you
want
to
do
the
contrib
update.
C
Sure
I
can
remember
to
unmute
myself
sure
so
this
week
we
have
three
new:
contributed
modules
with
official
releases
collapse,
a
block
views,
block,
exposed,
filter
block
and
nice
messages.
So
thank
you,
everybody
for
continuing
to
release
projects
and,
as
nate
mentioned
before
we
started
the
video.
There
are
a
whole
bunch
more
that
recently
got
transferred
into
the
backdrop
kind
trip
group
that
don't
yet
have
official
releases,
but
a
lot
of
great
activity
going
on
in
backdrop,
control
right
now,.
A
Excellent
thanks,
jen,
okay,
let's
see
we'll
go
into
the
general
discussion,
part
of
the
meeting.
We
have
a
forum
post
that
kind
of
guides
these
discussions
every
week,
it's
forum.backdropscms.org
under
events
and
meetups,
there's
a
thread
there,
where
we
solicit
ideas
for
discussion
or
topics
that
need
some
feedback
and,
let's
see
we'll
go
through
them
here.
A
One
of
the
issues
raised
was
that,
upgrading
to
122
version
of
backdrop,
there
was
a
funny
set
of
consequences
where
there
was
a
bug
that
views
include
files,
weren't
being
included
all
the
time,
and
so
we
fixed
that
bug
in
122.1.
A
But
then
it
caused
a
problem
in
a
popular
module,
meta
tag
that
meta
tag
had
defined
the
same
function
in
two
places
and
now
suddenly
that
second
place
was
starting
to
be
included,
whereas
previously
it
wasn't-
and
so
I
don't
feel
bad
about
fixing
the
module.
But
it
is
an
unfortunate
unfortunate
thing
where
it's
like
things
aren't
supposed
to
break,
but
meta
tag
isn't
supposed
to
have
the
same
function
in
two
places:
either
so
yeah
it
just
kind
of
exposed.
A
bug
and
meta
tag
is
what
happened
well
anyway.
A
The
good
news
is
that
we
got
a
new
release
of
meta
tag
out
this
past
week
to
solve
that
issue.
So
if
you're
facing
that
problem
or
if
you
haven't
upgraded
to
122,
yet
it's
a
good
idea
to
upgrade
meta
tag.
Module
first
before
you
do
your
core
updates
and
that
will
sidestep
that
particular
problem.
If
you're
using
meta
tag.
A
What
may
happen
on
some
page
loads
is
that
you'll
get
a
white
screen
of
death,
and
so,
if
you
have
php
errors
turned
on
you'll
see
that
you'll
get
an
error.
Saying
function,
meta
tag,
views
api
has
already
been
defined,
I
think,
is
the
function
name
or
something
views
something
meta,
tech
view
something
and
yeah.
So
you
can
see
that
in
your
php
error
log,
but
if
you're
just
getting
a
white
screen,
that's
probably
what
it
is.
A
Nope
doesn't
hurt
the
database,
it's
literally
yeah,
it's
it's
just
a
temporary
thing
or
if,
if
you're,
really
in
a
panic,
we
had
some
people
just
go
into
the
meta
tag
module
it
doesn't
matter
which
one
you
change.
If
you
just
delete
one
of
the
two
functions
where
the
same
thing
is
defined
in
two
places
that
will
work
and
there's
only
one
function
inside
of
the
meta
tag,
views.inc
file.
A
All
right,
yes,
that
at
least
is
fixed.
That's
great
yeah.
I've
been
on
a
little
bit
of
a
contrib
adventure
this
week,
because
this
is
this
is
not
on
the
agenda,
but
I'm
just
excited
about.
I
started
my
first
backdrop
paid
project
this
week
and
the
very
first
thing
is,
like
you
know,
getting
all
these
modules
that
they
had
on
drupal
7.
justin
did
a
huge
amount
of
the
initial
work
on
this
same
project.
A
I'm
not
sure
if
we
can
talk
about
the
project
until
it's
done,
but
yeah
it's
going.
It's
going
great
and
a
side
effect
of
this
is
that
there's,
like
some
small
issues,
small
issues
like
this
meta
tag,
one
that
cropped
up,
and
I
was
like
oh
yeah,
I'd
like
to
fix
help
with
that
and
jen's
the
maintainer
of
meta
tag.
So
we
got
approval.
A
I
got
approved
from
her
to
work
on
meta
tag,
module
and
then
I
had
an
xml
sitemap
and
then
larenz
the
maintainer
that
he
gave
me
permission
to
work
on
that.
So
we
got
a
new
release
of
xml
sitemap
this
week
too.
Anyway,
it's
been
great,
I'm
so
excited
it
feels
good.
It's
like
the
first
time
I've
enjoyed
work
in
like
years.
C
Oh
yeah
nate
is
so
happy.
It
is
great
I'm
just
like.
Oh
my
gosh
he's
like
getting
worked
out
and
he's
like
working
like
past
five
o'clock
in
the
evenings,
where
I'm
like
what
what's
going
on?
Were
we
privileged?
He
was
like
no
more
meetings.
I'm
gleaming
I
hate
meetings
and
now
he's
like
coding
is
fun.
It's
great
yeah.
I
found
a
fatal
error
in
the
new
release
of
xml
sitemap,
but
I've
already
filed
a
pull
request
against
it.
So,
oh.
A
A
It's
not
a
new
regression,
it's
just
an
existing
issue.
A
A
Let's
see
sorry,
there's
one
one
more
thing
on
my
little
escapade
into
actual
backdrop:
site
development,
I've
been
trying
b
because
of
backdrop
live
and
that's
been
a
really
pretty
pleasant
experience.
Using
b,
I
wrote
a
documentation
page
for
setting
for
using
b
in
combination
with
dev
it's
in
the
b
project.
Wiki
works
great!
That's
that's!
Well!
A
I
have
to
say
about
that,
but
it
is
nice
that
using
a
tool
like
d
dev,
orlando,
it
can
be
very
convenient
because
you
don't
need
to
be
inside
of
a
particular
directory
like
if
your
web
directory
is
nested
inside
of
your
project.
You
can
just
use
be
at
the
the
parent
route
without
going
into
the
web
directory
using
either
ddw.
A
Okay,
sorry,
I'm
getting
way
off
track.
Let's
see!
Jen,
you
had
an
issue
that
you
mentioned
in
the
forum
issue:
40
29
user,
compare
visibility:
rule!
Can
you
introduce
that
issue?
Sure.
C
A
C
A
C
A
summary
on
this
issue
about
a
month
ago,
and
I
asked
for
feedback,
because
I
redid
the
user
interface
for
it
and
haven't
gotten
any
answers.
Just
another
request.
But
essentially
this
is
a
feature
that
existed
in
drupal
7
and
when
we
moved
all
of
these
visibility
conditions
to
backdrop,
it
was
excluded.
C
C
It
was
like
user
one
user
two
and
it
was
really
hard
to
tell
which
one
was
user
one
and
which
one
was
user
two,
and
so
I
redid
the
interface
for
backup
where
I
assumed
that
user
one
is
always
the
authenticated
user
and
you
just
say:
is
it
the
authenticated
user
or
is
it
not
the
authenticated
user
and
it
rather
than
having
to
define
which
one
was
which
and
whether
they
matched
or
not?
C
So
the
visibility
condition
has
a
sort
of
a
more
custom
interface
that
it
limits
the
scope
of
what
it
can
do,
but
it
meets
the
majority
use
case
and
I
think
people
having
like
two
users,
neither
of
which
is
authenticated,
is
sort
of
a
rare
edge
case,
and
I
don't
necessarily
think
that
needs
to
be
supported
in
core.
C
So
I
think
that,
having
the
cleaner
user
interface
to
define
what
you're,
probably
trying
to
do
is
better
than
a
more
generic
user
interface,
it's
really
hard
to
figure
out
what
you're
trying
to
do
and
there's
a
lot
of
good
feedback
in
there
in
terms
of
what
we
might
be
able
to
do
with
the
interface.
But
because
I
was
working
with
the
interface,
that's
provided
by
the
layout
condition
system.
C
I
couldn't
do
it
quite
the
way
it
was
requested,
so
I
tried
to
do
my
best,
but
I
would
love
to
have
some
more
feedback
on
what
that
actually
looks
like
and
if
it
makes
sense
to
people
to
try
and
place
a
block.
That's
only
visible
to
myself
on
my
own
page,
and
so
I
think,
there's
some
good
steps
for
testing
on
there
too,
and
I
would
just
want
to
know
if
people
like.
A
C
And
if
they
think
it's
perhaps
a
good
candidate
for
a
future
core
version
release
at
some
point,
new
feature
really
says
and
if
so,
if
it
needs
tests.
A
A
Looks
great,
though,
taking
a
look
at
it
now
it
yeah.
I
like
the
concept,
simplification
quite
a
lot,
and
you
you
what
happened?
C
A
C
But
if
you're
on
a
node
layout-
and
you
don't
have
you
don't-
have
any
additional
author
context
added,
you
won't
see
this
option.
If
you
add
the
author
to
the
node
layout,
then
it
will
be
available
with
that
fix.
C
That
works
for
every
condition
that
requires
contexts
right
now,
because
it's
a
bug
in
layouts
doesn't
have
anything
to
do
with
this
condition.
There's
like
we
have
this
concept
of
required
contacts
that
aren't
actually
required,
and
so.
A
C
A
Okay,
great.
A
Okay,
45.94
blocked
by
49.
I
forgot
25
94.
A
A
This
is
great
yeah
also
related
to
the
the
previous
issue.
4029,
the
user.
Compare
visibility.
Do
you
want
to
be
an
advocate
for
that?
I
don't
think
you're.
C
A
Okay,
great
all
right
all
right.
The
last
item
we've
got
in
the
agenda
or
in
the
from
the
forum
this
week
is
issue
1602
layout
paths,
an
issue
that
robert
has
been
working
on
for
the
past
several
weeks
or
months.
Even
that
expands
the
way
that
you
can
specify
paths
on
which
a
layout
is
applied.
That's
a
one-sentence
version,
but
robert
yeah
I'd
love.
A
If
you
could
talk
about
this
issue,
I'm
not
sure
if
it
needs
a
demonstration,
but
yeah
there's
a
lot
of
it's
kind
of
hard
to
wrap
your
head
around.
But
it's
pretty
easy
to
see
what
it
does
so
yeah
I'll.
Let
you
take
it
away
and-
and
we
can
talk
about
you-
know.
B
Yeah
so,
as
you
said,
the
basic
idea
is
it's.
The
title
of
the
issue
is
not
precisely
this,
but
it's
sort
of
the
issue
has
evolved
into
this.
I'd
like
to
be
able
to
apply
a
layout
to
more
than
one
menu,
router
path,
so
more
pads
that
are
listed
in
the
path.
The
single
path
field
for
the
layout
and
there's
been
a
couple.
B
There's
been
a
bunch
of
discussion,
a
couple
different
proposals
in
pr
the
version
that
I've
been
advocating
and
have
a
pr
for
adds
a
new
field
to
the
layout
called
url
paths,
and
it
behaves
very
much
like
the
url
path
field
of
a
visibility
condition
and
that
you
can
use
asterisks
as
wild
cards
and
it
works
for
both
normal
pads
and
alias
packs,
but
whereas
for
visibility,
conditions,
those
conditions
act
to
narrow
the
applicability
of
a
layout.
B
The
url
paths
field
of
a
layout
expands
the
applicability
of
the
layout
to
include
paths
that
match
those
conditions
and
one
other
condition
which
is
unique
to
layouts,
which
is
that
the
load
functions
need
to
match,
and
that,
unfortunately,
is
a
very
subtle
and
deeply
buried
issue.
B
But
it's
basically
necessary
because
suppose
you
have
the
path:
node,
slash
percent
and
the
path
user,
slash
percent-
and
you
want
to
use
a
layout
on
both
and
then
and
and
so
you're
presented
with-
let's
say
user
10,
but
you
I
mean
your
path
is
user,
slash,
10,
but
a
node.
Slash
percent
layout
wants
to
load
node
10
from
that
argument.
10.
B
Last
week
we
discussed
this
issue
the
design
meeting.
We
came
to
the
conclusion
sort
of
tentative
conclusion,
then
of
saying:
let's
not
deal
with
that
problem.
Let's
not
allow
this
new
layout
thing
to
work
for
paths
that
have
placeholders
in
them,
and
so
we
wrote
that
in
the
comments-
and
we
almost
immediately
got
feedback
saying
no.
This
is
from,
I
think,
rgp
saying
no.
B
This
is
the
situation
that
I
want
to
use
this
on,
where
they
do
have
placeholders
and
if
there
aren't,
if
there's
no
load
path,
discrepancy,
there's
no
problem,
so
we
can
so
we
can
use
it
and
it
works
swimmingly
if
there's
no
load
path
discrepancy,
so
I
put
that
back
in,
but
then
I
got
to
thinking
this
is
to
explain
this
in
use.
It
needs
documentation.
B
There
is
some
explanation
in
the
pr
when
you
you
know
description
below
that
field.
It's
got
a
toggle
expansion
to
give
you
even
more
description
below
that
field,
but
really
the
whole
thing
should
be
documented,
and
so
the
in
my
last
comment
on
the
issue,
I've
posted
a
link
to
what
I
would
propose
as
the
documentation
page
the
draft
documentation
page
to
go
on
docs.be.org.
B
That
explains
this.
This
feature
and
and
paths
in
general
and
and
so
what
I'm
kind
of
asking
people
at
this
point
is
is
for
two
things
and
you
see
the
handgen,
I'm
sorry
I'll
wrap
up.
I'm
asking
for
two
things:
one
is:
are
there
use
cases
that,
because
I
gave
in
the
documentation
example
of
several
use
cases?
B
Are
there
use
cases
that
you
would
use,
but
that
aren't
addressed
by
this
now
you
know,
so
we
can
try
to
cover
the
80
of
possible
use
cases,
and
the
second
thing
is:
does
that
documentation
make
sense
to
you?
So
so
that's
kind
of
my
request
at
this
point
and
jim
thanks.
C
So
I
raised
my
hand
because
I
wanted
you
to
finish,
but
I
also
didn't
want
to
forget,
so
I
thought
that
would
help
both
of
us.
First
of
all,
do
you
have
a
link
to
that
documentation
somewhere
the
one
in
the
issue
every
time
I
click
it,
it
tries
to
download
a
file.
I
don't
know
that
might
be
my
browser's
problem.
C
I
thought
that
might
have
been
in
my
browser
boom,
okay
and
then.
The
other
thing
I
was
thinking
is
that
part
of
me
feels
like.
If
we
can't
build
an
interface
for
this
that
can't
be
used
without
additional
documentation,
then
we
probably
shouldn't
put
it
in
core,
but
that
doesn't
mean
we
can't
build
an
interface
for
it
and
sometimes
robert
the
act
of
just
writing
out
the
documentation
like
this
might
just
make
something
clear
that
we
can
add
to
the
interface
for
it.
C
I
don't
know
what
alejandro's
use
case
was
so
I'll,
go
back
and
read
the
issue
and
see
what
that
is,
but
I
don't
know
the
way
the
way
that
we
have
to
solve
the
problem
now
with
like
multiple
layouts,
even
if
they're
identical
it
could
it
it
could
be.
You
know,
that's
the
solution.
C
I
would,
I
wonder
if
his
use
case
meets
the
80
requirement
to
have,
because
I
don't
know
how
many
paths
there
are
in
core
that
have
a
word
followed
by
percent,
where
that
percent
is
going
to
be
the
same
for
more
than
one
thing
like
we
just
have.
We
don't
have
that
in
court,
so
the
fact
that
he
has
to
have
a
contrib
module
to
even
create
a
use
case
where
that
exists
seems
like
adding
support
for
that
into
court
might
not
be
valid.
B
So
the
use
case
where
it
comes
up
is
when
in
views,
if
you,
if
you
create
two
views
with
different
view,
paths
that
each
take
contextual
filtered
arguments-
and
you
want
to
use
the
same
layout
on
both
that
can't
be
done
currently
in
chord,
and
it
can
be
done
with
this
field.
B
Okay-
and
I
I
would
also
say
I
some
way
you
phrased
it,
you
said
it
can't
be
used
without
going
to
a
documentation
page.
I
think
it
can
in
the
most
common
use
cases,
I
hope
are
obvious,
just
from
the
user
interface,
but
there's
sort
of
power
and
depth
and
and
how
to
do
those
extra
power
and
depth
things
are
what's
described
in
the
documentation.
B
B
C
Views,
contextual
filters
right,
so
it's
like
a
perfect
parallel,
because
that's
a
deep
dive
in
views
and
doing
the
same
thing
here
would
be
a
deep
dive
and
lance
okay.
Well,
let
me
go
look
at
it.
I
want
to
go,
read
the
comments,
because
I'm
not
sure
my
my
what's
it
called
when
your
hair
stands
on
and
when
you
said
that
I
was
just
like.
C
Oh
I
don't
know,
it
sounds
like
it's
really
bad,
but
I
haven't
seen
the
the
use
case
and
I
haven't
seen
the
interface
specifically
now
that
it's
been
fixed
for
that.
So
let
me
go
look
at
all
of
it
and
I'll
see
what
we
think,
but
yeah.
C
Also
yorkshire,
pudding
is
not
here
right
now
to
say
this
again,
but
he
did
say
in
the
last
meeting.
I
just
wanted
to
get
this
on
record
for
everyone
here
that,
after
reading
your
documentation,
he
understood
layouts
so
much
better
than
before,
and
so
I
think
that's
also
really
valuable
just
to
have
people
who
might
be
struggling
with
the
concept
of
layouts,
because
it's
so
different
from
drupal
to
have
a
resource
like
that.
B
A
Yeah,
I
I'd
like
to
walk
through
this
a
little
bit
more
robert.
If
it's
okay
I'll
share
my
screen
and
we
can
show
kind
of
what
this
looks
like
so
okay.
So
this
is
the
issue.
A
There
we
go
so
this
is.
This
is
the
main
issue.
This
is
the
original
description
and
then
yeah.
Here's
the
documentation,
page
that
that
we're
discussing
that's
in
a
markdown
file,
but
then
we
can
also
go
look
at
the
sandbox,
so
I've
already
logged
into
the
sandbox
here
and
I'll
add
a
new
layout.
A
Oh
I
already
started
one
thing:
let's
see,
how
do
I
feels
kind
of
weird
doing
this
like
I
need
to
cancel
we'll
start
all
over
okay.
Here
we
go
too
helpful.
Okay,
so
let's
say
sure
we
want
to
do
posts,
and
so
we
want
to
say,
like
node,
slash
percent
context,
pops
up,
and
this
is
the
new
field
and
yeah.
So
I'm
not
I'm
not
sure
node.
Slash
percent
is
the
best
example,
because
I
need
something
else
that
took
a
node.
A
I
guess
maybe
like
node,
slash
percent,
slash
edit
or
something
like
that
or
you
know,
maybe
something
that
was
like
comments
or
something
that
was
a
tab
under
node
would
probably
work
as
a
as
a
possible
thing.
Yeah
just
out
of
curiosity.
How
does
this
deal
with
admin
paths
versus
front
end?
Paths
like
if
you
have
a
primary
path,
that's
running
and
a
secondary
path.
That's
backend!
What
happens
there.
B
It
it
doesn't
distinguish
between
whether
something
is
has
the
word
admin
in
it.
I
mean
you
know
so
so
yeah
you
could
use
the
same
layout
on
a
public
facing
and
on
an
admin
page.
A
I
mean,
I
guess
yeah
I
mean
fine
yeah.
Why
not?
I
don't.
It
would
just
be
a
little
bit
strange,
perhaps
but
yeah
I
don't
see.
Why
there's
any
reason
why
you
couldn't
do
that,
I
guess
yeah.
C
Might
be
a
better
match
to
the
experience
people
it's
more
like
a
like
if
you
hit
edit
on
a
page,
and
you
would
expect
like
everything
on
that
page
to
be
editable,
it
might
make
more
sense
if
you
had
the
same
layout
on
the
front
end
on
the
back.
So
I
think,
there's,
like
a
use
case,
a
use
case
for
having
the
same
layouts.
Even
if
the
theme
is
different,
having
all
the
stuff
in
the
same
place
could
still
be
really
valuable
for
people.
A
B
C
B
Me
an
asterisk
yeah.
Oh
in
fact,
actually
that's
a
good
point.
There
probably
should
be
validation
to
make
sure
that
you
don't
include
a
placeholder.
C
A
But
you
could
do
like
like
this.
This
would
definitely
like
this
would
work
to
get
the
added.
C
A
C
A
Of
agreeing
with
jen
here
on
a
couple
of
things
that
this
is
like,
you
know
like
contextual
filters
and
views
that
this
is
like
a
an
advanced
concept
and
one
thing
I
think
that
we
could
drastically
improve.
I
think
for
working
on
this.
This
interface
is
fine,
but
we
could
drastically
improve
this
by
lowering
its
visual
importance
on
the
page
like
instead
of
you,
know
having
it
be,
a
field
that
is
always
here.
Perhaps
there's
like
a
like
another
plus
thing
below
primary
path.
A
A
Oh,
no,
hang
on
that
path
isn't
correct,
and
then
you
do
one
path
at
a
time
rather
than
you
know,
having
a
big
text
area
that
all
of
them
need
to
be
validated
all
together,
and
that
would
kind
of
hide
the
complexity
and
put
it
in
a
place
where
it's
like.
It's
only
seen
by
by
the
people
that
that
need
it
potentially.
B
A
A
B
B
A
Thing,
that's
nice
about
the
current
approach,
or
maybe
maybe
good
or
maybe
not,
but
you
know
if
you
were
to
change
this
at
some
point
to
something
else.
Let's
say
I
did
change
this
to
user.
A
You
know,
like
context
already,
does
that
work
here?
Oh
it
looks
like
my
url
pads
actually
got
wiped
out
by
that
change.
B
B
A
B
B
A
C
Or
just
have
three
different
views
in
the
body
area,
one
for
page
one,
one
for
page
two,
one
page
three
and
I
don't
have
to
worry
about
the
18
other
blocks
that
are
identical
across
all
three
of
those
pages.
This
is
for
backup,
cms.org
right.
The
only
difference
is
the
one
block
in
the
middle
of
the
page
and
everything
else
on
the
page
is
identical.
C
A
A
B
Opposite
no!
No!
No!
No!
Last
week
it
was
all
it's
always
only
been
for
override
pages,
but
what
we
removed
it
for
there's
a
difference
between
override
pages
and
dynamic
pages,
dynamic
pages
are
the
things
with
placeholders.
That's
what
we
removed
it
from
in
the
meeting
last
week.
C
C
C
I
thought
that
worked
already
with
lay
out
wild
cards.
A
B
Yeah,
so
it
allows
the
url
paths
to
be
either
either
a
a
normal
path
or
an
alias,
and
it
enforces
the
load
function,
rule
and
I'm
not
sure
what
I
don't
remember.
What
layout
wildcard
does
about
load
function.
Rules
would.
B
Well,
I
it
wouldn't
because
there's
layout,
so
one
difference
is
because
this
works
for
both
normal
pads
and
aliases
and
laid
out
wild
card
only
works
for
normal
pads.
One
could
conceive
of
a
use
case
where
you
didn't
want
it
to
work
for
an
alias
that
matched
I
mean
so
they're,
not
identical.
That's
that's
one
issue.
The
other
thing
is
layout.
B
Wildcard
does
something
else
that
has
no
correlation
here,
which
is
what
in
layout
wildcard,
is
called
ancestor
matching,
which
is
that,
if
that's
turned
on
this
layout,
the
layout
will
match
if,
if
its
path
is
any
ancestor
of
the
request
path
and.
B
B
B
B
A
Yeah,
I
I
wonder
one
thing
that
I
I
that
I've
always
wondered
about
this
particular
issue
is
if
the
solution
that
is
being
put
forward
actually
solves
the
original
request
or
if
we're
going
to
need
to
also
solve
the
original
request
again
like
in
another
way
so
jen,
you
actually
made
the
original
request,
which
is
that
the
path
field
doesn't
behave.
C
A
As
you
expect,
and
that
continues
to
kind
of
be
the
case
like
this,
like
you
know
doing
this,
for
example,
doesn't
doesn't
work
as
as
you
would
expect,
or
even
even
something
more
typical
like
if
you
just
did
note
slash
star,
you
know.
B
B
So
you
know
so
so
trying
to
allow
for
wild
cards
in
that
place
means
content.
You
know
every
time
you
change
the
character
there
I
mean
you'd
need
multiple
context,
sections
for
every
possible
interpretation
of
of
that
of
that
field
I
mean
so,
for
example,
if
you,
if
you
put
in
star
e,
slash
star
well,
that
would
match
both
node
slash
percent
and
it
would
match
user
slash
percent,
but
the
contexts
are
different.
C
Yeah,
I
was
thinking,
and
I
don't
remember,
I
think
this
was
discussed
way
earlier
in
the
thread
it's
just
sort
of
like
translating
so
if
somebody
types
node,
slash
percent,
we
would
just
rewrite
or
node
star.
We
just
like
rewrite
that
as
percent
and
be
like.
We
think
this
is
what
you
meant
like
we
fixed
it
for
you,
so
we
could
still
add
that
to
this
nate
and
it
would,
it
would
solve
the
original
problem
and
it
wouldn't
affect
anything
else.
I
think
what
I
was
envisioning.
A
C
Percent
yeah,
it
would
be
like
we
think
you
meant
this
to
apply
to
all
content
pages,
and
so
what
you
meant
was
no
slash,
percentile
we're
just
going
to
rewrite
it,
and
that
way
it
would
have
the
affected
behavior,
but
it
wouldn't
remain
with
a
star
there
that
could
be
interpreted
dangerously
like
later
on.
You
know,
because
what
it's
still
saved
is
no
person.
A
C
C
A
C
A
C
Think
I
think
another
thing
that
I
was
thinking
about
too
is
like
okay,
if
you,
if
you
create
a
layout-
and
you
just
say
I
want
this
layout-
this
configuration
to
apply
on
a
second
path,
but
right
now
the
only
way
you
can
do
it
is
take
the
layout
and
hit
clone
and
then
put
the
second
path
in.
But
you
end
up
with
all
of
the
information
identical
except
for
the
path.
So
what
I
wanted
was
a
second
path
field.
C
So,
rather
than
having
to
save
the
identical
configuration
four
times,
you
only
save
it
once
and
now
you
just
have
multiple
options
in
there
and
I
think
that
that
works
as
long
as
there's
no
contexts
but
as
soon
as
you
add
a
context
that
fails,
and
so
that's
what
I
was
trying
to
get
at
last
week
is
that
if
we
don't
include
contexts,
you
meet
that
use
case,
and
you
don't
have
to
worry
about
all
of
these
other
complexities,
but
and
like
thinking
it
from
a
technical
perspective
like
the
data
is
identical,
except
for
that
field.
C
So
it
made
sense
to
to
build
the
interface
to
match
that,
but,
like
I
think,
what
we're
getting
at
here
is.
Everybody
has
a
different
use
case
for
this
right,
where
some
people
want
to
just
put
an
asterisk
in
this
field,
and
some
people
want.
You
know
what
I
want,
which
is
standalone
pages,
are
the
same,
and
some
people
don't
want
standalone
pages.
They
want
view
pages
that
are
the
same,
and
some
people
want
different
contexts
that
are
the
same
loader
and
I'm
not
sure
we
can
solve
all
those
with
the
same
solution.
A
Yeah,
because,
even
if
we
get
this
to
a
point
where
we
effectively
make
it
so
layouts
work
on
multiple
paths
and
it
covers
all
the
use
cases
of
well
all
the
use
cases
of
layout
wildcard
and
then
then
a
little
bit
more
then
great.
We've
we've
added
a
major
new
feature
to
core,
but
it's
not
actually
solving
at
least
the
asterisk
confusion.
So
I
don't
yeah.
Maybe
we
just
continue
running
through
this
to
completion.
C
B
B
I
mean
to
create
that
page,
but
also
be
used
on
other
paths
of
such
and
such
form.
If
we
could.
So
if
people
could
post
those
use
cases,
then
we
could
kind
of
look
at
whether
this
or
something
like
it
can
be,
can
satisfy
that
use
case,
or
you
know,
or
if
or
maybe
for
some
use
cases.
A
A
There's
not
really
a
reason
why
you
couldn't
also
do
that,
like
you
know,
when
you
save
a
layout
and
you
make
up
a
new
path
like
this,
it
creates
two
config
files,
one
for
the
layout
configuration
and
then
one
for
the
menu
item
that
controls
like
the
menu
item
entry.
If
you
added
another
one
like
added
foo
and
bar
and
baz
paths,
it
could
create
three
menu
entries.
You
know
like
it
could
do
that,
that's
not
impossible,
but
it
would
be
a
pretty
big
scope.
B
Yeah,
so
I
guess,
if
I
let's
let's
say
I
I
create
the
primary
path
is
food
because
I
want
to
create
a
layout
page
at
food,
but
I
want
to
use
that
same
layout
on
all
my
node
pages.
So
I
give
it
the
url
path
of
node,
slash
star.
A
C
B
But
I
think
I
think,
though
I'll
have
to
check
this,
but
you
could
create
separate
layouts
layout
pages
for
foo
bar
and
baz
and
then
create
a
new
layout.
B
A
C
A
C
C
A
Because,
oh
no
so
wow,
so
this
is
actually
two
two
layouts
at
the
same
path.
Wow
didn't
didn't
know
you
could
do
that.
Yeah
sounds
like
yeah,
some
additional
validation
there.
C
C
Some
people
would
choose
to
do
that
with
one
layout
with
block
visibility
conditions,
but
other
people
might
choose
to
do
that
with
two
layouts
and
layout
visibility
conditions.
So
I
think,
like
we
need
to
be
a
little
bit
careful
about
adding
like
new
validation
to
things.
People
might
actually
be
using
legitimately,
because
it
seems
like
a
bad
idea.
It
doesn't
it's
not
a
feature
that
people
are
depending
on.
A
Okay.
Well
sorry,
we
we're
oh,
my.
C
A
Yeah,
it's
it's
a
huge
issue,
like
the
I
mean,
with
the
the
scope,
expansion
of
what
you
could
possibly
use
it
for
there's
a
whole
separate
conversation
about
this
robert
about
the
performance
implications
of
figuring
out
which
layout
should
be
applied.
That
makes
me
really
nervous
that
I
haven't
looked
at
it
to
see
like
how
efficient
it
is,
but
you
know
I
would
suspect
that
we
need
to
loop
through
every
layout
in
the
whole
system.
C
A
And
there's
some
kind
of,
I
think
maybe
it
makes
a.
I
can't
quite
remember
how
it
does
this.
It
does.
Some
kind
of
it
makes
a
a
map
or
something
like
that.
That's
just
like
this
path
equals
this
layout,
so
it
doesn't
have
to
keep
doing
it,
but
I
could
yeah
I'll
anyway.
That's
a
whole
thing
that
needs
to
need
to
look
sorry.
I
should
just
stop
because
I
I
don't
really
remember
how
that
works.
A
Okay,
yeah
well
we're
all
out
of
time
for
today,
before
we
close
it
we'll
skip
the
the
123
update,
because
we
don't
have
time
for
today
but
since
herb
joined
us,
I
want
to
check
herb.
If
you
had
anything
you
wanted
to
bring
up
or
discuss
before
we
we
exit.
A
Oh
yeah
yeah
that
was
yeah
so
entity
reference
first
of
all,
since
this
is
the
first
time
we've
spoken.
Thank
you
so
much.
That's
so
amazing
like
I.
I
can't
even
hardly
believe
it
actually
so
yay
and
any
references
in
core
a
little
bit
123.
A
and
we've
got
a
lot
of
follow-up
issues
for
it
and
yeah
that
one
about
file
uri.
I
just
posted
right
at
the
beginning
of
the
meeting
that
maybe
it
was
before
we
started
the
recording
that
yeah
that
that
issue,
basically
there's
a
bunch
of
people
that
think
that
it's
ready,
but
nobody
wants
to
market
rtbc.
Even
I
feel
a
little
bit
bad
about
marking
it
rtbc
and
then
immediately
merging
it.
But
if,
if,
if
you
want
to
merge
it.
A
I
said
I
wanted
to
wait
another
week
just
because,
like
I
it's
kind
of
a
it's
an
api
break,
yes
questionable,
although
with
alejandro's
audit
of
existing
use,
I
feel
pretty
good
about
it.
A
A
But
yeah
yeah,
I
think
that
that
file
entity
one
is
kind
of
important
that
we
get
in
123,
because
it's
an
api
break
and
it's
a
good
time
to
justify
the
api
break
other
stuff
like
separating
out
term
reference
or
turning
it
on
by
default.
A
I
feel
like
there's
not
really
a
big
hurry
and
in
some
cases
it
might
even
be
better
to
like
slow,
slowly
separate
things
out
like
so
people
have
time
to
adjust.
But
if
it
happens,
I
also
won't
be.
You
know,
upset
about
that.
So.
A
Okay,
all
right
well
we're
all
out
of
time.
Thank
you,
everybody
for
for
joining
today,
thanks
for
the
great
discussion
on
layout
pads
that
was
invigorating.
A
And
yeah,
I
hope
hope
everybody
has
has
a
great
day
so
see.