►
From YouTube: Weekly Developer Meeting April 7, 2022
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
april
7th
2022,
and
this
is
the
weekly
backdrop
developer
call
we
get
together
every
week
and
talk
about
priorities
and
tasks
for
backdrop
core
and
some
things
beyond.
A
In
some
cases,
we'll
go
ahead
and
do
some
introductions
for
those
who
are
in
the
meeting.
My
name
is
nate
lampton,
I'm
quick
sketch
on
the
internet
and
I'm
a
core
committer
for
backdrop,
we'll
go
to
wilbur
and
then
robert.
A
All
right
welcome
this
is
it
for
today,
today's
cruise
slim
but
mighty.
A
Let's
see
we
normally
do
a
contrib
update
jen's,
not
here,
we'll
skip
that
portion
for
today
and
we'll
just
have
an
extra
large
lineup.
Next
week
we
have
a
forum
post
every
week
where
we
solicit
ideas
for
discussion,
and
we
had
two
issues
that
were
raised
this
past
week.
A
views
hooks
are
not
invoked
when
the
path,
property
and
hook
views
api
is
not
set
so
an
awfully
long,
jargony
title
there,
but
it
basically
comes
down
to
the
way
that
hook
views
api
worked
in
drupal
7.
I'm
guessing
is
not
the
same
as
it
works
in
backdrop
that
it
used
to
work
one
way,
and
now
it
works
slightly
differently
in
backdrop,
and
there
is
a
pull
request.
A
That's
bw
panda
filed
that
just
makes
it
work
the
way
that
people
expect
it
to
work
but
yeah
it.
It
needs
review,
I'm
not
totally
sure
about
the
particular
approach.
Robert,
do
you
want?
Do
you
have
anything
you
want
to
add
about
this
one
since
you
raised
it.
A
That
what
the
pull
request
is
suggesting
is
if
a
file
exists,
it
automatically
gets
included,
and
but
there
is
a
hook
that
also
lets
you
specify
where
the
file
could
be
located,
and
if
it
is
there
and
and
if
you
specified
it,
then
it
tries
to
include
it.
So
it's
kind
of
a
like
a
question
of
like
do.
A
We
automatically
discover
a
file
based
on
its
naming
and
location,
or
do
we
request
that
a
developer
points
at
the
file
through
a
hook-
and
I
think
that's
kind
of
the
big
question
here
is
like
how
often
do
we
do
this
kind
of
magical
loading?
We
do
it
all
the
time
with,
of
course,
with
things
like
hooks
right,
if
a
function
name
exists
and
the
hook
gets
called
and
that's
the
way
that
it
works
and
but
but
for
most
other
things,
we
don't
necessarily
do
that.
A
Based
on
the
file
name,
I
mean
there's
the
dot
info
file.
Of
course
that
gets
discovered
and
the
tests
file
get
that
gets
discovered,
but
the
purposes
of
those
things
are
to
kind
of
identify
everything
else
in
the
system
that
needs
to
be
loaded
classes.
Don't
get
automatically
discovered,
we
have
hook
class
info
that
requires
you,
map
the
class
names
to
the
file
locations
and
most
other
things
as
well
like
hook
menu.
A
You
know,
require
you
specify
path
in
order
to
say
where
your
callbacks
are,
and
I,
but
this
is
kind
of
an
interesting
case,
because
it's
it's
like
a
an
include
file
for
views
and
we
have
certain
things
like
an
include
file
for
tokens,
for
example,
that
they
automatically
get
included
as
well,
but
they're
defined
through,
like
hook
hook
info,
like
you,
gotta
manually,
specify
if
your
hooks
get
automatically
loaded
or
not
so
I
don't
know,
I'm
I'm
not
opposed
to
the
idea
of
automatically
loading
the
file.
A
I
just
want
to
kind
of
audit
the
way
the
other
things
are
automatically
included
and
determine
if
this
is
the.
If
this
fits
the
pattern
of
like
you
know,
should
we
be
automatically,
including
this
or
not?
So
that's.
The
only
real
question
here
is
is
like.
Let's
try
to
be
consistent,
I
think
welcome
olaf.
B
A
We're
just
wrapping
up
one
topic.
The
first
issue:
do
you
have
anything
you'd
like
to
discuss
today.
A
I
think,
because
you
don't
need,
we
don't
want
to
wait
two
weeks
honestly,
it's
two
weeks
we
might
not
have
with
the
release
cycle
coming
to
close.
So,
let's,
let's
go
ahead
and
talk
about
it
today
see
if
we
can
get
it
going
I'll
finish
the
forum
topics
and
then
then
we
can
go
right
to
that.
A
Okay
and
the
second
issue
that
we
had
raised
in
the
forum
is
issue
5480
a
stalled
issue
that
indigozella
raised
that
the
entity.
Sorry
that
that
the
access
method
on
the
file
entity
is
doesn't
do
the
same
thing
as
the
function
file
underscore
access.
So
we've
got
two
different
things
that
check
for
file
access
and
they
don't
work
the
same
way.
A
Normally.
What
we
prefer
to
have
happening
is
we
still
have
procedural
wrappers
for
object,
oriented
methods
and
normally
the
procedural
wrapper
like
node
load,
for
example
or
node
view
then
calls
the
underlying
entity
and
then
just
calls
the
same
method
inside
the
entity.
That's
what
we
would
prefer
so
that
it
works
both
ways
and
it
works
consistently
between
them,
and
I
believe
this
issue
is
basically
trying
to
unify
those
two
things.
A
Unfortunately,
this
is
is
stuck,
but
the
real
hold
up
is
just
on
a
technical
review
and
I
don't
think
there's
actually
that
much.
That
needs
to
be
discussed
so
I'll.
Try
to
take
a
look
at
this,
but
this
is
actually
just
a
call
out
that
we
need.
We
need
technical
review
on
issue
5480
to
try
to
move
this
forward.
A
A
concern
here
is
that
indigozella
is
providing
steps
to
do
testing
she's,
saying
oh
well,
we're
having
trouble
moving
this
forward.
Here's
some
things
to
test
which
is
first
of
all
very
helpful,
because
even
if
you're
not
familiar
with
code,
you
can
definitely
try
out
doing
this
test
thing
testing
these
things
out
manually.
A
But
that
is
a
concern
to
me
because
it
says
that
maybe
we
need
automated
testing
in
here
as
well,
because
that
should
already
be
covered
through
the
the
the
automated
tests.
A
A
Okay.
I
wish
I
had
more
things
to
say
on
that
issue,
but
yeah.
I
think
that
that's
that's
where
we
are
okay.
Well,
let's
go
ahead
and
do
an
update
on
all
of
the
122
issues.
Since
we
didn't
have
a
lot
of
forum
topics
today
and
we're
kind
of
a
small
crew,
olaf.
Let's
start
with
the
one
that
you
mentioned,
which
is
the
card
content
type
issue
4903,
we
have
a
pull
request
that
creates
the
content.
Type
adds
it
to
the
standard
profile
creates
a
new
home
page
layout.
A
Puts
them
on
puts
three
cards
on
the
home.
Page
adds
a
new
view.
Everybody's
looked
at
it
at
this
point,
everybody's
seen
it
and-
and
it's
really
really
close
and
where
we
are
now.
I
haven't
seen
any
discussion
on
the
issue
in
a
couple
of
weeks.
Other
than
talking
about
the
pictures
that
we
should
use
on
the
cards
is:
does
that
sound
about
right,
for
where
we
are?
Is
that
the
only
thing
that
we're
talking
about
at
this
point
go
ahead?
Robert.
B
You
know
there
was
something
I
raised
just
a
couple
of
days
ago,
which
was
suggesting
renaming
the
view
and
its
display
to
explicitly
refer
to
the
home
page,
to
both
make
it
easier
for
beginners
to
see
that
these
things
all
work
together
and
and
then,
and
that
would
affect
the
documentation
so
like
right
now
the
block
is
called
block
or
the
display
is
called
block
and
the
view
is
called
card
grid
and
I
think
well,
if
we
call
it
home
page
view
and
home
page
block
or
something
like
that.
B
A
A
Yeah
good
good
good
thought.
I
don't
think
that
there's
been
a
lot
of
thought
around
the
naming
convention.
So
that's
a
really
great
call
out
yeah
and
that's
not
very
difficult
to
change
either.
I
don't
think,
did
you
did
you
post
your
suggestion
about
what
you
think
it
should
be.
B
A
Is
there
anything
else
that
it's
stuck
on?
Besides
this
picture
picture
problem.
C
No,
I
think
we
then,
after
a
decision
about
the
pictures,
still
do
some
fine
tuning
regarding
consistence
and
optimal
configuration
like
which
what
you
posted
once
about
the
image
style,
how
it's
exactly
configured
and
such
things,
but
that's
all
fine.
You
mean,
I
think.
A
Yeah
and
there's
a
big
difference
here
between
the
image
style
that
we're
shipping
here
comes
with
the
standard
profile,
but
it's
not
an
image
style
that
is
shipped
with
image
module
and
so
that
affords
us
flexibility
to
change
it
in
the
future,
because
it's
not
something
that
will
affect
all
sites,
and
it
won't
be
something
that
contrib
modules
can
even
count
on
existing,
because
it
only
exists
within
an
install
profile,
which
is
just
a
starting
point,
not
a
configuration
that
everybody
can
expect
to
exist.
A
So
it
is
nice
that
basically,
everything
we're
doing,
including
deciding
on
these
images,
for
what
are
in
the
cards,
is
all
stuff.
That
is
just
populating
default
content,
which
means
we
can
change
it
later
at
any
time
and
it
won't
even
impact
existing
sites.
Of
course,
if
your
existing
site
was
using
the
three
default
images
that
came
with
the
cards,
you
probably
haven't
changed
your
home
page
like
I
don't
think
people
are
gonna,
actually
use
the
three
sample
images
that
we
use
for
a
long
period
of
time.
A
It's
purely
just
demonstrate
the
things
in
the
first
place.
It's
it's
all
about
the
out
of
box.
Experience
not
about
stuff
that
you're
going
to
be
using
on
on
your
actual
site,
although
you
definitely
could
especially
the
the
content
type
and
the
view.
C
One
thing
robert
because
I
didn't
read
the
draft
of
the
documentation,
but
I
think
we
should
consider
also
to
mention
how
to
remove
the
thing
easily,
because
I
think
some
people
might
want
to
change
it,
but
maybe
they
don't
have
an
idea.
How
which
images
to
use
at
the
moment
and
just
want
to
remove
it
and
with
the
other
things
with
the
first
post
and
the
about
page.
It's
quite
easy,
just
delete
it,
and
with
this
block
we
should
mention
somewhere
how
to
remove
it.
In
the
layout
page.
B
So
the
documentation
page,
I
wrote,
is
actually
a
documentation
page
about
the
home
page
and
it
does
walk
through
this
home
page,
but
it
also
mentions
along
the
way
the
other
ways
you
can
create
a
home
page
and
and
wraps
up
with
a
listing
of
like
five
or
six
different
ways.
You
can
change
the
home
page.
Changing
out
cards,
use
a
view,
use
a
layout
create
a
page.
B
So
I
would
my
goal
was
to
try
to
do
that.
The
I
guess
I'd
ask
not
just
you,
but
our
viewing
audience
anyone
else
who
can,
because
it's
an
unpublished,
documentation,
page,
look
at
the
documentation
page
and
see
if
it
addresses
that
goal
adequately
and
if
not,
please
make
suggestions
in
the
documentation
issue
to.
C
Update
it,
okay,
yeah
sounds
good,
and
also
many
thanks
for
working
on
this,
which
is
really
good,
important
thing.
A
Yeah,
the
documentation
is
very
much
appreciated
during
backdrop
live.
I
was
so
surprised
to
hear
from
some
of
our
newer
people
that
were
jumping
into
the
community.
They
were
very
complementary
about
our
documentation.
They
were
like
a
handbook
is
excellent.
A
C
A
Yeah
we
we've
had
lots
of
people
weigh
in
on
which
choices
they
prefer.
I
think
a
lot
of
us
have
reservations
about
the
particular
like
voting
approach
to
like
make
a
decision,
but
robert
mentioned
before
the
call
that
it's
still
helpful
to
have
people's
opinions
like
registered,
even
if
that's
not
actually
quite
how
we
make
the
decision.
A
I
think
it's
important
at
this
point
that
we
figure
out
how
how
does
this
decision
get
made?
You
know,
even
though
everybody
is
seems
really
for
the
most
part
amiable.
You
know
everybody's,
like
posting,
their
their
favorite
choices,.
C
A
A
Makes
the
final
decision?
Obviously
we
have
the
pmc
that
could
be
used
to
make
this
decision
for
us.
I
I'm
curious
about
that
because
I
don't
know
if
that's
like,
if,
if
this
is
like
the
level
of
decision
that
actually
needs
to
go
to
the
pmc
or
or
possibly
like
court
committers
could
get
together
and
they
could
make
the
decision.
A
I
don't
know
yeah
what
do
you?
What.
C
C
Yeah,
I
have
some
thoughts
so
first,
maybe
for
people
who
didn't
follow
the
discussion,
just
a
quick
recap.
So
I
a
few
days
ago,
I
suggested
oh,
I
made
screenshots
of
the
various
formal
suggestions
from
the
discussion,
so
we
had
the
screenshots
and
based
on
this
I
asked
people
to
vote
and
to
mention
one
favorite
and
and
then
other
other
suggestions
which
are
acceptable
or
okay
and
and
then,
as
you
said,
some
people
said
they
are
a
bit
skeptical
about
the
voting.
C
And
if
that
should
drive
our
decision
and
I
first
I
would
like
to
clarify
that
I
didn't
suggest
the
voting
with
the
goal
to
just
apply
the
highest
voting,
but
to
to
get
a
impression
of
what
people
like
based
on
the
screenshots
and-
and
I
think
the
results
are,
however,
quite
interesting,
even
if,
if
they
are
not
already
the
decision
and
there's
clearly
a
trend
visible,
and
so,
if
you
want,
I
can
quickly
share
my
screen
and
show
a
spreadsheet
where
you
can
see
the
results.
Okay,.
C
Okay,
so
it's
really
quick
and
dirty
so
here
the
seven
suggestions
of
which
we
have
screen
shots,
they,
you
can
look
at
them
in
the
issue
queue
and
I
have
marked
the
highest
votes
of
each
column
in
bold
orange.
C
So,
for
example,
the
three
different
colors
from
basis
got
the
most
favorite
woods,
but
two
other
suggestions
got
the
most
votes
as
acceptable
suggestions,
and
so
you
can
see
quickly
that
wait.
These
three
suggestions
got
the
most
votes,
are
the
most
popular
so
voting.
I
think,
helps
at
least
to
sort
out
the
other
suggestions,
so
we
can
focus
on
these
three
and
we
don't
have
to
consider
the
other
ones.
C
I
think
so,
let's
make
them
bold
for
the
moment,
yeah
and
then
12
people
voted
so
far
by
the
way
and
and
I've
also
tried
to
to
weight
the
results.
So
the
totals
are
these
ones.
C
And
I've
then
awaited
the
accepted
acceptable
votes
only
as
half
as
important
as
the
favorites,
and
so
this
is
then
the
final
interesting
column.
In
my
opinion,
and
still
these
three
suggestions
are
the
interesting
ones,
and
so
now
it's
important
to
know
that
I've
only
provided
screenshots
for
bases
in
the
standard
colored
scheme.
C
I
don't
think
that
it's
I
I
don't
agree
really,
but
I
think
we
have
to
discuss
now
if
we
really
need
a
designer
and
don't
find
it
a
decision
without
a
designer
or
if
we
can
decide
any
way
and
maybe
improve
the
images
later.
A
Interesting
what
I
would
be
leaning
towards
is
we
have
been
using
the
current
images
for
several
months
now
and
there's
been
other
opportunities
to
change
the
images
and
that
hasn't
happened,
and
it's
also
one
of
our
three
favorites
right.
So
it's
it's
one
of
the
top
three.
A
However,
considering
how
tightly
tied
all
three
of
these
options
are,
I'm
not
sure
that
we
would
ever
get
anywhere
on
the
follow-up
issue,
so
it
would,
it
would
be,
it
would
be
like
a
fake.
You
know
like
let's
solve
this
later
knowingly
like
punting
it
and
never
solving
it
later.
You
know,
so
I
do
kind
of
feel
like
unless
there's
something
really
drastic
like
we
have
a
new
theme
coming
to
core
that
these
images
are
likely
to
stick
around
for
you
know
until
that
point,
so
it
would
be
kind
of
nice
to
get
the
right.
A
The
right
choice
made,
or
at
least
accept
that
the
one
that
goes
in
is
the
one
that
is
likely
going
to
stay
so
punting
it.
Although
tempting
I,
I
don't
think
that
that
would
really
be
fair
as
far
as
taking
into
account
people's
feedback
that
they
provided
and
all
the
options
that
have
been
put
forth.
C
C
What
do
you
think
you?
I
think
you
didn't
take
part
in
the
discussion
much
so
maybe
it
would
be
interesting.
B
I
didn't
vote
in
the
in
the
color
schemes
or
anything,
but
since
this
isn't
a
critical
item,
that's
going
to
have
a
lasting
it's
it's
sort
of
a
show-and-tell
item
that
will
probably
go
away.
B
B
And
also
to
nate's
point
earlier
is
that
if
we
want
to
change
those
images
later,
we
can
they're
not
tied
to
anything
else
that
they
can
be
changed.
So
if
somebody
says
hey
those,
those
images
are
really
dated,
then
it's
like
okay,
we
could
change
them,
but
I
think
they
look
fine
and
they
work
well
with
the
color
schemes
that
we
have.
So
I
think
we
could
go
forward
with
them
the
way
they
are.
C
And
do
you
refer
to
the
the
ones
which
are
in
the
current
pr,
so
the
with
with
the
green
and
the?
What
is
it
no
and.
A
C
A
Does
it
pager
in
on
github.
C
No,
it's
that's.
A
C
It
makes
it
makes
disappear,
some
comments
in
the
middle
and
you
can
click
on
it,
show
them.
B
Yeah,
it
shows
just
a
break
with
229
hidden
items.
C
C
Yeah
and
the
idea
or
the
wish
to
get
a
designer
in
it
I'm
I
agree
that
would
be
nice,
but
the
designer
should
yeah
bring
some
time
to
really
work
on
it
and
read
the
discussion
and
so
on,
and
I
don't
know
if
that's
realistic
before
may
so.
A
Yep
yeah,
I
I
also
have
a
a
little
bit
of
a.
A
Leaning
towards
you
know,
usually
only
a
couple
of
people
make.
You
know
the
design
decisions.
Ideally
a
designer
makes
all
the
design
decisions
and
then
someone
else
signs
off
on
them.
And
it's
not
a
I
mean
you
can
provide
feedback,
but
usually
the
designer
implements
something.
And
then
you
you
try
to
follow
the
designer's
intention
like
from
beginning
to
end.
A
A
C
A
So
tim
is
the
advocate
and
you're
the
one
that
filed
the
issue
and
have
put
in
the
work
and
done
all
the
surveys
and
everything
like
that
and
I
think,
with
all
the
information
we
now
have.
It
should
be
one
of
you
that
makes
that
decision,
and
I
don't
know
that
I
have
the
authority
to
say
that
you
have
the
authority,
but
that's
the
way.
C
A
Okay
sounds
good.
I'm
going
to
post
a
comment
just
expressing
my
opinion
of
delegating
that
responsibility
to
you
and
tim
and
then
we'll
see
what
you
guys
come
back
with.
A
Okay,
thank
you,
olaf,
for
bringing
that
up
and,
of
course,
for
all
your
work.
Thank
you
for
aggregating
the
results,
as
well
as
as
well
as
aggregating
the
options.
So
thank
you
for
for
moving
that
forward.
A
Okay,
let's
see
we
have
a
we'll
go
we're
going
to
try
to
run
through
the
remaining
issues
for
the
122
milestone,
which
there's
four
of
them
and
we'll
see
if
we
can
get
through
them.
The
first
one
is
3992
dropping
support
for
versions
of
php
prior
to
5.6.
A
That's
been
in
the
needs
review
state
for
almost
two
months
now.
I
think
that
we
may
be
at
a
point
where
we
just
need
to
say:
okay,
let's,
let's
get
this
in,
because
we're
not
going
to
make
the
deadline
for
the
next
release
unless
it
gets
merged
soon.
I
think
our
hope
had
always
been
to
have
it
in,
for
the
longest
amount
of
time
possible
to
allow
for
regression
checking
and
things
of
that
nature,
and
so
without
any
other
movement.
A
It
is
passing
full
test
coverage
and
all
of
the
feedback
has
mostly
been
about
whether
or
not
we
still
need
one
or
two
of
the
things
that
we
used
to
have
in
place
for
compatibility.
It's
a
questionable
if
we
still
need
to
maintain
them,
but
officially
like
it
does.
You
know,
drop
support
and
prevents
you
from
using
backdrop
on
those
lower
php
versions.
A
This
issue
is
seeing
a
lot
of
excitement
recently,
where
we
are
trying
out
a
full
pivot
here
from
using
the
reference
module
from
contrib
to
using
entity
reference
and
we've
had
herb
dual
the
maintainer
of
entity.
A
Reference
do
work
to
prepare
nd
reference
for
being
included
in
core
and
he's
now
filed
a
pull
request
that
maintains
the
entity
reference
history,
all
the
way
from
drupal
7
through
the
contrib
module
in
backdrop
now
into
core,
which
is
what
we
request
for
all
modules
that
are
moved
into
cores,
that
they
maintained
their
their
git
history
and
yeah.
He's
he's
got
it
in
there
that
there's
a
now
a
poll
request
that
needs
your
view
that
just
literally
just
plops
the
module
into
core.
A
A
Merged
modules,
I
think,
is
the
name
of
the
function
and
that
simply
that
has
an
automatic
behavior
that
if
you
have
both
the
contrib
module
and
the
core
module
installed
or
available
it
just
posts
notices
to
the
status
report,
saying
you
should
turn
you
should
remove
the
contrib
module
unless
you've
done
this
intentionally
to
let
the
core
module
take
its
place,
and
so
we've
done
that
for
seven
or
eight
modules.
Already
so
that's
things
like
you
know,
redirect
and
link
module
lots
of
modules.
A
We've
already
done
this
sort
of
thing,
where
we've
taken
the
contrib
module
and
put
it
into
core.
So
this
is
a
known
process
that
we
have
the.
We
then
have
follow-up
issues
to
deal
with
things
like
term
reference
is
included
in
taxonomy
module
and
we
need
to
come
up
with
a
process
for
replacing
it
with
entity
reference
long
term.
I
don't
think
that
we
need
that
for
the
initial
implementation
of
entity
reference,
however,
so
that
you
know
that
can
be
a
follow-up,
even
the
initial
inclusion
of
a
reference
field
in
core.
A
We
don't
need
to
turn
it
on
out
of
the
box.
It
would
be
in
a
way
kind
of
like
an
experimental
module
that
is
there,
but
not
turned
on
yet
like
we
did
for
for
telemetry.
A
So
the
the
real
interesting
thing
is:
I
I
think
that
we
need
people's
feedback
as
to
the
overall
approach
at
this
point
because,
like
we
never
really
made
the
decision
that
entity
reference
is
the
way
to
go,
but
we
did
all
decide
that
entity
reference
is
the
easiest
solution,
the
most
mature
solution
and
the
most
flexible
one
and
the
one
that
most
people
are
using
and
the
one
that
has
the
most
dependencies.
A
A
It
would
also
be
interesting
because
entity
reference
is
made
as
a
contrib
module.
If
there's
any
kind
of
discrepancies
with
like
you
know
what
you
would
expect
in
an
out
of
the
box
experience.
Obviously,
we're
still
going
to
have
term
reference
versus
entity
reference
for
the
time
being,
but
what
can
we
do
like?
Are
there
any
other
weird
inconsistencies
that
make
putting
any
reference
into
core
awkward.
A
But
that
is
very
exciting.
There's
the
pull
request
and
that's
moving
moving
forward.
B
A
Yeah
correct,
so
if
you
already
had
any
reference
installed
on
your
site
and
you
upgrade
to
the
next
version
of
backdrop
that
moves
it
into
core,
your
contrib
module
still
takes
precedence
and
so
yeah.
It
basically
makes
so
nothing
happens
to
your
existing
site,
which
is
what
we
want
really
and
then,
at
a
time
when
you
want
to
switch
to
the
core
version,
you
simply
remove
it
and
then
clear
the
caches.
And
then
then
it
picks
up
the
new
location.
A
Yeah,
I
think
that
I'm
not
sure
this
has
happened,
but
the
contrib
module
could
also,
in
theory,
have
updates
to
it
that
specifically
call
out
the
fact
that
maybe
you
should
turn
it
off,
because
the
contrib
module
can
still
have
new
releases
and
changes.
We
just
really
discourage
that
because
we
don't
want
them
to
actually
diverge
in
terms
of
capability
yeah.
C
A
A
May
actually
so
it's
it's
really
tight
honestly
for
this
entity
reference
one
and
it
hasn't
been
planned.
This
whole
release.
So
I'm
not
totally,
I'm
not
optimistic
that
it
will
actually
be
completed.
Feature
freeze
is
may
1st,
so
that
only
gives
us,
you
know
less
than
four
weeks
to
what's
the.
A
To
wrap
it
up,
1301.
A
Okay,
we're
almost
out
of
time
but
I'll
just
quickly
reference.
These
last
two
issues,
there's
a
real
small
issue
issue
5000.
B
B
So
really,
there's
not
much
downside
to
this
right
now
because
we
could
put
it
in
and
it
would
be
available,
but
the
currently
people
that
have
it
installed
would
still
have
it
installed
until
they
intentionally
took
it
out
and
then
they
would
start
using
the
entity
reference
module.
A
Yep,
okay
got
it,
and
and
if
people
had
a
different
reference
module
like
node
reference
or
so
that's
references
or
the
reference
module
either
of
those
two
other
options,
you
would.
A
A
Yep
but
they're
literally,
the
same
module
also
so
right
yeah,
so
so
they're
not
gonna
have
issues
yeah
and
on
on
top
of
all
of
that.
This
also,
if
we
put
it
in
initially,
it
won't
be
even
enabled
on
new
installations.
Yes
right.
C
A
There
really
is
like
this
won't
actually
do
anything
to
any
existing
site
by
putting
it
in,
but
it
will
substantially
impact
the
way
that
we
move
forward,
like
removing
term
reference,
for
example,
and
turning
on
entity
reference
by
default
and
if
we
turn
on,
if
we
do
remove
term
reference
entirely,
that
could
cause
problems
for
some
sites,
because
then
nd
reference
would
need
to
be
turned
on
to
replace
it.
A
B
A
B
A
B
A
Yep
you're
saying
all
those
things
makes
it
sound
feasible,
which
it
conceivably
is.
It's
really
you
know
this
is
a
decision
that
we're
going
to
be
stuck
with
for
quite
a
while,
and
I
think
that's
that's.
My
primary
concern
is
like
we're
really
like
we're
setting
ourselves
into
this
path
for
sure
yeah.
B
A
Which,
which
would
honestly
be
a
really
good
thing,
because
it
the
art
reference
situation,
is
very
confusing
and
probably
one
of
the
biggest
downsides,
I
think,
to
to
backdrop
over
drupal
is,
like
backdrop,
doesn't
have
references
out
of
the
box
and
our
mentality
has
been
you
don't
need
to
download
stuff
after
you
install
backdrop
and
you
have
to
install
a
reference
module,
it's
it's
crucial
for
a
system
like
backdrop
to
be
able
to
do
references.
B
Can
I
ask
one
more
question:
I
know
we're
a
little
late
here,
but
what
about
the
migration
path
from
drupal
7
into
backdrop?
Is
there
an
easy
process
of
bringing
in
references
and
using
that
core
module
to
do
that?.
A
A
Similarly,
references,
node
reference
and
user
reference
to
references
and
contrib
also
provides
its
upgrade
path
from
drupal
7..
So
if
you're
using
that
in
dribble
7,
you
install
the
same
thing
for
backdrop
and
and
it
upgrades,
we
probably
will
want
at
some
point
a
convert
from
one
field
to
the
other.
So
you
can
get
off
of
term
reference
onto
entity
reference.
A
If
that's
the
solution
we
go
with
that
and
the
the
problem
is,
is
that
there's
so
many
of
them
that,
like
supporting
them,
is
complicated
and
possibly
not
a
good
core
fit,
because
you
may
need
to
adjust
them
and
it's
like
whether
or
not
you're
coming
from
drupal
7
or
whether
or
not
you're,
coming
from
the
backdrop
version
or
also
different
situations,
I
I
think
it
would
be
best
suited
by
contrib
solution
that
deals
with
that,
and
the
only
thing
core
would
handle
would
probably
be
term
references
getting
them
from
term
references
to
entity
references
because
that's
the
only
problem
that
core
itself
has
created.
A
Well,
thank
you
wilbur.
Those
are
all
great
questions
we're
out
of
time.
We
had
a
couple
other
issues,
but
we'll
just
postpone
those
and
maybe
we'll
check
in
on
them
next
week.
Both
of
them
are
in
good
places
anyway,
so
maybe
they'll
be
merged
by
this
time
next
week.
A
Get
up
from
my
computer,
okay!
Well
thanks
everybody
for
for
joining
today,
great
conversation
and
we'll
see
you
online
and
next
week.