Replace JPATH_PLATFORM with _JEXEC

[laoneo]

Replaces JPATH_PLATFORM with _JEXEC as JPATH_PLATFORM. Like that we have one way to check if the CMS is loaded correctly.

[sandewt]

What to do with this? Consequences? Depreceated?

joomla-cms/libraries/cms.php

Line 22 in a517383

if (!defined('JPATH_PLATFORM')) {

joomla-cms/libraries/cms.php

Line 28 in a517383

require_once JPATH_PLATFORM . '/loader.php';

joomla-cms/libraries/import.legacy.php

Line 21 in a517383

if (!defined('JPATH_PLATFORM')) {

joomla-cms/libraries/import.php

Line 21 in a517383

if (!defined('JPATH_PLATFORM')) {

[brianteeman]

Surely this is a breaking change

[laoneo]

What does break? Happy to solve any bc issues.

[laoneo]

What to do with this? Consequences? Depreceated?

joomla-cms/libraries/cms.php

Line 22 in a517383

if (!defined('JPATH_PLATFORM')) {

joomla-cms/libraries/cms.php

Line 28 in a517383

require_once JPATH_PLATFORM . '/loader.php';

joomla-cms/libraries/import.legacy.php

Line 21 in a517383

if (!defined('JPATH_PLATFORM')) {

joomla-cms/libraries/import.php

Line 21 in a517383

if (!defined('JPATH_PLATFORM')) {

These must stay for backwards compatibility.

[brianteeman]

What does break? Happy to solve any bc issues.

Any tool that people have written to check for the presence of the check will fail.

[laoneo]

The check should still work as the defines are still in place. @sandewt pointed them out in his last comment. Only the occurrences in the CMS code are changed.

[brianteeman]

The check should still work as the defines are still in place. @sandewt pointed them out in his last comment. Only the occurrences in the CMS code are changed.

it is those occurences I am referring to.

this is a disruptive change for zero benefit and should definitely not be made in a minor release

[laoneo]

So you agree that it is not a bc break?

[wilsonge]

This was proposed in the past and we agreed things in the libraries folder was a b/c break because there were concrete examples of cli apps (in the j3 format) even on our own joomla.org sites defining JPATH_PLATFORM instead of JEXEC.

So yes it's a b/c break. You should be fine with the changes in the administrator folder however.

To be clear I'm a 👍 for merging this for 5.0 however.

[sandewt]

See, also for completeness:

#39535 (comment)

#40337 (comment)

[laoneo]

I can't really imagine how you can run joomla 4 without jexec so I wouldn't count this as break. But I do also have no issue to rebase to 5. For me is more important that we get rid of inconsistency.

[brianteeman]

I can't really imagine how you can run joomla 4 without jexec so I wouldn't count this as break.

@wilsonge already said there are cli apps

[laoneo]

I did rebase this one #and made a deprecation pr for 4.4 #40366.

[wilsonge]

To be clear this is still technically a b/c break against what production agreed. However I thiink this is a good and positive change and should be merged anyhow.

[laoneo]

Is there something documented about this vote? I'm not aware of any discussion.

[wilsonge]

I've not been in the meetings since 4.0 finished (so 1.5 years now) but https://volunteers.joomla.org/departments/production/reports/1793-production-dept-meeting-minutes-august-23-2022 was the motion i understood to have been approved which is deprecation for two major versions before removal hence #38657 being merged which was 99% of the originally intended 5.0 deprecations going back to 6.0

[laoneo]

You was talking before about that PLATFORM should not be deprecated issue. The 2 years policy I'm aware of.

[HLeithner]

@laoneo can you sync the branch and add a deprecation notice in joomla 4.4 for this /files#diff-af833392184ea677c8d50f3b09187a3602ecb4eaed7b35a622fbf2e96ff1d3e6 (defining the constant) please

[laoneo]

Did the sync, but not sure what you want for a notice where?

[HLeithner]

Thanks