Closed brandonkelly closed 8 months ago
Thanks!
I didn't want to open up a new issue for this, but it would have been great to support the static
field option until running the Matrix migration. Wish there would have been a field group
to avoid all this in the first place.
The big issue is in templating because the static field didn't require .one()
. It's just such a headache after an already painful Craft v4 upgrade (not anything to do with SuperTable).
It also would have been nice to mark the plugin as no longer maintained like readactor. I was totally blindsided, had no idea SuperTable was finished until I saw everything broken.
The goal of the Craft 5 version of Super Table was always migration-only. If we included code for the functionality of the plugin until migration, that means that people can use Super Table on Craft 5 until a technically optional migration. We didn't want to go down that route, and made it more of a hard transition.
It's the perfect time to do template changes which are typically more involved, due to the major version pinning against Craft 5, otherwise we'd never attempt this. In your instance, if we continued to provide functionality for the static
Super Table field until such a time as you decide to migrate Super Table to Matrix, we'd have to continue supporting that functionality.
I know it's a pain with the template changes though!
My only concern with marking Super Table as no longer maintained is that's not strictly the case. We still maintain it for Craft 4, and I don't want people on Craft 4 to get the wrong idea that Super Table is suddenly "gone". However, we'll add a note to the description on the plugin page, in case people don't see the GitHub notice, or blog post.
Without the
contentTable
property, Super Table fields nested within Matrix fields will lose theircontentTable
config values as their configs are recreated here. Without that, thecraft5
migration won’t know where to fetch the field’s content from.