WP_Classic_To_Block_Menu_Converter class declaration bug in Gutenberg 15.7.0 - 16.1.0

[getdave]

The original code for WP_Classic_To_Block_Menu_Converter was published in the original PR which landed in 15.7.0 as WP_Classic_To_Block_Menu_Converter.

When the class was merged into Core for 6.3, @ramonjd applied a fix in #51959 to rename the class to use the Gutenberg_ prefix. However this has not been backported to the older Plugin releases.

This means that if someone runs 6.3 with an older version of Gutenberg Plugin ( < 16.1.0 ) then they will get a duplicate class definition error because WP_Classic_To_Block_Menu_Converter will be present in Core and the Plugin.

[getdave]

@ramonjd I beleive the fix required here is to backport your #51959 to all Gutenberg Plugin releases from 15.7.0 (where the original code landed) to 16.0.0 (because your fix landed in 16.1.0).

Do you agree?

[ramonjd]

I beleive the fix required here is to backport your #51959 to all Gutenberg Plugin releases from 15.7.0 (where the original code landed) to 16.0.0 (because your fix landed in 16.1.0).

That sounds like a reasonable approach, and would make things consistent with the naming conventions.

We could recommend to folks that are having conflict issues now to upgrade to 16.1 (or disable the plugin totally if they're running 6.3, which contains most of the latest features anyway)

[mrfoxtalbot]

Thank you for the follow up here, @getdave 🙏

[getdave]

My understanding is that we only support the latest 3 versions of the Plugin so the backports weren't required. Am I right @ramonjd?

[ramonjd]

My understanding is that we only support the latest 3 versions of the Plugin so the backports weren't required.

👋🏻 I'm actually not sure about the exact number of previous versions the plugin supports, however, the Gutenberg plugin is still described as containing "bleeding-edge features" so I believe now that nudging folks to upgrade the plugin rather than backport is the most appropriate way to handle this.

That means I would say backporting bug fixes in this case isn't required - if it were, it would probably have to occur much more often than it does 😄