[bradenmacdonald]

This is a high-level plan for replacing contentstore, building on the earlier PRs in this stack (mostly #822).

Read the rendered docs here

AI disclosure: Claude helped me with research, writing, and formatting the RST, but I wrote/rewrote much of the final content.

[openedx-webhooks]

Thanks for the pull request, @bradenmacdonald!

This repository is currently maintained by @axim-engineering.

Once you've gone through the following steps feel free to tag them in a comment and let them know that your changes are ready for engineering review.

🔘 Get product approval

If you haven't already, check this list to see if your contribution needs to go through the product review process.

• If it does, you'll need to submit a product proposal for your contribution, and have it reviewed by the Product Working Group.
  • This process (including the steps you'll need to take) is documented here.
• If it doesn't, simply proceed with the next step.

🔘 Provide context

To help your reviewers and other members of the community understand the purpose and larger context of your changes, feel free to add as much of the following information to the PR description as you can:

• Dependencies

  This PR must be merged before / after / at the same time as ...

• Blockers

  This PR is waiting for OEP-1234 to be accepted.

• Timeline information

  This PR must be merged by XX date because ...

• Partner information

  This is for a course on edx.org.

• Supporting documentation
• Relevant Open edX discussion forum threads

🔘 Get a green build

If one or more checks are failing, continue working on your changes until this is no longer the case and your build turns green.

Details

---

Where can I find more information?

If you'd like to get more details on all aspects of the review process for open source pull requests (OSPRs), check out the following resources:

• Overview of Review Process for Community Contributions
• Pull Request Status Guide
• Making changes to your pull request

When can I expect my changes to be merged?

Our goal is to get community contributions seen and reviewed as efficiently as possible.

However, the amount of time that it takes to review and merge a PR can vary significantly based on factors such as:

• The size and impact of the changes that it introduces
• The need for product review
• Maintenance status of the parent repository

💡 As a result it may take up to several weeks or months to complete a review and merge your PR.

[ChrisChV]

While read-only, a warning should be shown in Studio on the course Files page

This won't just happen on the Files page. It can also occur with course_image, banner_image, video_thumbnail_image, etc. Would this also happen when creating a new rerun of the course?

[bradenmacdonald]

A re-run should work fine, since re-runs do not modify the original course.

It can also occur with course_image, banner_image, video_thumbnail_image, etc.

Good thinking, but most of those are just text field settings on the advanced settings page; changing the text fields will still work fine. I think the only other place where you can actually upload a file is the "Course card image" widget on "Schedule & Details", and it's very unlikely that users will be changing that during the brief migration period. In any case, it's more of an implementation detail, and this ADR just needs to capture the high-level overview of the process and the major decisions about it, not list every UX detail.

[ChrisChV]

And what about reruns in Willow? If the setting is set to "migrated," does creating a rerun of a legacy course result in a legacy rerun or a migrated one?

[bradenmacdonald]

Hmm, I think re-runs should generally use the system default for new courses, whatever that setting is.

If things are working fine, there's no reason not to use "migrated" for new courses, and if there's issues then the default setting for new courses will be "legacy" and re-runs won't break anything.