WARNING: THIS SITE IS A MIRROR OF GITHUB.COM / IT CANNOT LOGIN OR REGISTER ACCOUNTS / THE CONTENTS ARE PROVIDED AS-IS / THIS SITE ASSUMES NO RESPONSIBILITY FOR ANY DISPLAYED CONTENT OR LINKS / IF YOU FOUND SOMETHING MAY NOT GOOD FOR EVERYONE, CONTACT ADMIN AT ilovescratch@foxmail.com
Skip to content

Conversation

@mhsdesign
Copy link
Member

@mhsdesign mhsdesign commented Oct 8, 2025

Adjustment after the upmerge of #5638 for 9.0

This is a step of the process to remove the fusion migration task from neos/rector. People who already updated via the neos/rector migrations or already are on Neos 9.0 will find this migration obsolete - though we cannot recognise that and thus the migration will be run on the package never-the-less if executed via ./flow flow:core:migrate

To especially prevent these new fusion migrations from being run they have to be manually excluded before running flow:core:migrate by modifying the composer.json to include:

{
    "extra": {
        "applied-flow-migrations": [
            // ...
            "Neos.Neos-20251005080230",
            "Neos.Fusion-20251006080506"
        ]
    }
}

Users already on 9.0 might need to exclude the fusion migrations when updating to this patch as there could be false positive detections when using ${item.label} or ${item.identfier} in Fusion which is found by this migration as possible unsafe. The migration recognises that the variable item could be node which would require manual adjustments and thus the migration adds a todo comment to the file. These todo comments then might be totally obsolete for people already on a working 9.0.

Upgrade instructions

Review instructions

The command neos9preparation:preadjustfusion from Neos 8.4 was removed as flow:core:migrate Neos.Demo --version 20251005080230 is now its successor

Checklist

  • Code follows the PSR-2 coding style
  • Tests have been created, run and adjusted as needed
  • The PR is created against the lowest maintained branch
  • Reviewer - PR Title is brief but complete and starts with FEATURE|TASK|BUGFIX
  • Reviewer - The first section explains the change briefly for change-logs
  • Reviewer - Breaking Changes are marked with !!! and have upgrade-instructions

…n Fusion code to the new Neos 9 API

The command `neos9preparation:preadjustfusion` from Neos 8.4 was removed as `flow:core:migrate Neos.Demo --version 20251005080230` is now its successor
This is not part of the 8.4 migrations

This reverts commit 60b7a58.
@mhsdesign mhsdesign force-pushed the feature/addFusionCoreMigrationForNeos9Update branch from 6430f8c to fdb8764 Compare October 30, 2025 09:58
…igration

the YamlWithComments which allowed this is a funny beast but a lot of complexity just comments https://github.com/neos/rector/blob/efbff0d060f9cf115c7c99fdcefeb07c488a3273/src/Core/YamlProcessing/YamlWithComments.php#L7

In fusion we add warning comments instead to the beginning of the file which should also server well.

In the future we want to evaluate if we can migrate yaml by keeping the current comments - if we manage that we can also probably inject some ourselves cleanly without hacks.
@mhsdesign
Copy link
Member Author

Denny and me agreed that we want to add these 3 migration files retroactively to Neos 9 via patch release as even running the core migrations on an existing running 9.0 project should not do any harm. And migrations are run explicitly under supervision of a developer:)

(*) it could happen that a false positive todo comment is written to fusion files but thats it :)
If there are no objections to this month old monolog discussion id like to continue with that:)

kitsunet and others added 2 commits December 8, 2025 09:06
…ionsFromRector

FEATURE: Add yaml Flow core Neos 9 migrations (previously in rector)
@mhsdesign mhsdesign merged commit dab24bc into 9.0 Dec 8, 2025
17 checks passed
@mhsdesign mhsdesign deleted the feature/addFusionCoreMigrationForNeos9Update branch December 8, 2025 17:38
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Projects

No open projects
Status: Review Required 👀

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants