Drupal Governance

The TWG coding standards committee is announcing an issue for final discussion. Feedback will be reviewed on March 20, 2019.

To help the initiative to update all deprecated code for Drupal 9 we need a standardized format for deprecation messages.

The TWG coding standards committee is announcing two issues for final discussion. Feedback will be reviewed on 11/13/2018.

New issues for discussion:

• Adopt the PSR-12 standard for PHP7 return types once Drupal 8 drops PHP 5 support
• Provide standard around type hinting

Needs love

The TWG coding standards committee is announcing two issues for final discussion. Feedback will be reviewed on 10/31/2017.

New issues for discussion:

• Disallow assignments in conditions - This is controversial and could use more feedback.
• Define order of object method modifiers as in PSR-2

Pending ratification

The TWG coding standards committee is announcing two issues for final discussion. Feedback will be reviewed on 9/19/2017.

New issues for discussion:

• Prefer || or && Over or or and in Logical Operators - this issue needs more support in order to be ratified.
• Explicitly disallow yoda conditions

Interested in helping out?

Open conversation is essential to the wellbeing of any community. It is especially important now, as we collaboratively determine how to evolve our governance.

This discussion thread is being posted as a place for ongoing conversation about recent community issues and the governance improvements that the community is collaborating on together.

For background information on additional conversations being held, we direct you to:

https://www.drupal.org/community/discussions

The TWG coding standards committee has provisionally approved 3 coding standards change proposals. These will need to be finally approved and implemented by core before being fully ratified.

The TWG coding standards committee is announcing three coding standards changes for final discussion. These appear to have reached a point close enough to consensus for final completion. The process for proposing and ratifying changes is documented on the coding standards project page.

The TWG coding standards committee is announcing two coding standards changes for final discussion. These appear to have reached a point close enough to consensus for final completion. The new process for proposing and ratifying changes is documented on the coding standards project page.

Official coding standards updates now ratified:

• Prefer != to <> for NOT EQUALS

The TWG coding standards committee is announcing two coding standards changes for final discussion. These appear to have reached a point close enough to consensus for final completion. The new process for proposing and ratifying changes is documented on the coding standards project page.

New issues for discussion:

• Prefer != to <> for NOT EQUALS

The TWG coding standards committee is announcing two coding standards changes for final discussion. These appear to have reached a point close enough to consensus for final completion. The new process for proposing and ratifying changes is documented on the coding standards project page.

The four new issues being proposed are:

• [policy, no patch] Standardize indenting on chained method calls

The TWG coding standards committee is announcing two coding standards changes for final discussion. These appear to have reached a point close enough to consensus for final completion. The new process for proposing and ratifying changes is documented on the coding standards project page.

The two issues being proposed are:

The TWG coding standards committee is announcing two coding standards changes for final discussion. These appear to have reached a point close enough to consensus for final completion. The new process for proposing and ratifying changes is documented on the coding standards project page.

The two issues being proposed are:

• Please relax requirement for @file when using OO Class or Interface per file: 'ERROR | Missing file doc comment'

The security working group is proposing this policy around disclosure of private information. We are seeking community feedback.

In the past our policy has been a tad thin.

"State that you are willing to keep the confidential issues of the team confidential"

This document aims to add clarity to that sentence and some example scenarios to guide team members decision making.

We are seeking public feedback before making this a policy.

The policy is attached as a PDF.

Please provide feedback by commenting on the post

As mentioned during Dries's DrupalCon LA keynote, the Drupal Community Working Group is now accepting nominations for the Aaron Winborn Award, to honour Drupal community members who demonstrate personal integrity, kindness, and above-and-beyond commitment to the Drupal community.

Nominations are open until Monday 15 June 2015, and the selected recipient will receive a scholarship and stipend to attend DrupalCon with recognition during a plenary session at the event.

The Drupal project just turned 14 years old. There are now over 1 million known installations of Drupal, and Drupal.org has over 1 million users. Drupal 8 has over 2,700 contributors (almost three times that of Drupal 7) and over 13,000 commits so far (50% more commits per day on average than Drupal 7). I wanted to take an opportunity to reflect on our current governance structure and try to evolve the Drupal leadership team and decision-making, enable better scaling, and document both the formal and informal processes we have currently in place.

For the past few months, members of the Technical Working Group, Drupal.org Software Working Group, Security Working Group, and frequent project application reviewers have been working on proposed changes to the project application review process.

The proposed changes have been posted for public review. https://www.drupal.org/node/2453587

If you have any comments or questions, please add them to the issue. This proposal is open for feedback until the end of March. We will then incorporate the feedback and start working on implementing these changes.

In previous posts, we’ve talked about who the Community Working Group (CWG) is and why we’re here, as well some of the work we’ve done around establishing a process for conflict resolution in the Drupal community.

In this post, I’d like to go into more detail about what happens when folks file incident reports with the Community Working Group, and open up the conversation on how we can more effectively address issues that have a larger impact on the Drupal community as a whole.

Dries recently wrote a blog post about the challenges of fostering diversity and inclusivity in the Drupal community. This is the latest installment of a conversation that’s been going on for years.

In 2012, a group of Drupal community members worked together to draft a Code of Conduct that could be used to supplement the Drupal community’s Code of Conduct at DrupalCon and other in-person events.

Greetings from your friendly neighbourhood Drupal.org Software Working Group!

https://drupal.org/node/2261945 has a proposal + mockups on a new way to handle feature requests for Drupal.org in order to help both the Drupal.org Software Working Group and other working groups prioritize the feature roadmap for Drupal.org. Since this tool will become the method through which the Drupal community (in the widest sense of the word) makes known their Drupal.org needs/wants/desires, we'd love to hear your comments and feedback on the proposal.

UPDATE: The policy has now been adopted by the community working group. It lives here: https://drupal.org/conflict-resolution (now with pretty URL!)

For some time we've had a bit of unfinished business around the Drupal Code of Conduct around how we manage and respond to conflict.

The Community Working Group has drafted a policy and is now looking for community feedback over the next 2 weeks. Please check out the draft in the drupal-cwg issue queue.

https://drupal.org/node/2227717