[D8] Create partial config

There are some errors reported by automated review tools, did you already check them? See http://pareview.sh/pareview/httpgitdrupalorgsandboxlaszlokovacs2449463git

We are currently quite busy with all the project applications and we prefer projects with a review bonus. Please help reviewing and put yourself on the high priority list, then we will take a look at your project right away :-)

Also, you should get your friends, colleagues or other community members involved to review this application. Let them go through the review checklist and post a comment that sets this issue to "needs work" (they found some problems with the project) or "reviewed & tested by the community" (they found no major flaws).

I'm a robot and this is an automated message from Project Applications Scraper.

Please add
README.txt or README.md file

Please follow the README guidelines here: https://www.drupal.org/node/161085#readme

Specifically, please make sure to wrap text at 80 chars and follow the README template recommendations.

Export work good and useful module when I need export just same files
After install module and locate to extra tab in /admin/config/development/configuration all files selected.
1) It is partial export so better do unselected by default because uncheck that long list is annoying. Or add to form "uncheck all button".
2) after fresh drupal install and added module have all files under "Your current configuration has changed". but I don`t change anything
3) Your README.txt should contain module description not Drupal copy READMe.txt :)
4) Seems like your module not check for changed configuration. When I change site name nothing changes
5) "Add system.site info checkbox" at bottom confuse
.

@laszlo.kovacs like your module. It going to be in my tools set.
After you answer on question and fix something change status to need review
I will check your module later for now little buzy

1) Readme file still the same (just copy from drupal core). Should be description for your module.
2) Can t test module because when I do as you tell got Drupal error in Configuration synchronization
I export all config. After that import all. Do same changes. When came to Configuration synchronization got error.
Will report bug.

Opened issue #2535766: Configuration synchronization throws a TypeError on import and export if there are content type changes

Retest your module. Great work! But all check boxes still checked by default. Any way looks good for me.

You still need change you readme file with description of your module.

I use your module in project! Very good idea!

cool module!

Automated Review

Bad line endings: http://pareview.sh/pareview/httpgitdrupalorgsandboxlaszlokovacs2449463git

Manual Review

Individual user account

Yes: Follows

No duplication

Yes: Does not cause duplication and/or fragmentation

Master Branch

Yes: Follows guidelines for master branch

Licensing

Yes: Follows licensing requirements

3rd party assets/code

Yes: Follows guidelines for 3rd party assets/code

README.txt/README.md

No: Contains a typo in line 40 "directory (by deafult: sites/default/files/config_some-hash/staging)."

Code long/complex enough for review

Yes: Follows guidelines for project length and complexity.

Secure code

Yes: Meets the security requirements

Coding style & Drupal API usage

1. Typo in info.yml: "description: 'Partial export of modified configariton files'"
2. The module is listed in the module overview under "Configuration", I think it should move to package "Development", configuration inspector resides there too: https://www.drupal.org/project/config_inspector

Automated Review

Review of the 8.x-1.x branch (commit 7546e7d):

• Coder Sniffer has found some issues with your code (please check the Drupal coding standards). See attachment.
• No automated test cases were found, did you consider writing Simpletests or PHPUnit tests? This is not a requirement but encouraged for professional software development.

This automated report was generated with PAReview.sh, your friendly project application review script. You can also use the online version to check your project. You have to get a review bonus to get a review from me.

FILE: /var/www/drupal-7-pareview/pareview_temp/README.txt
----------------------------------------------------------------------
FOUND 0 ERRORS AND 7 WARNINGS AFFECTING 7 LINES
----------------------------------------------------------------------
 16 | WARNING | Line exceeds 80 characters; contains 81 characters
 39 | WARNING | Line exceeds 80 characters; contains 83 characters
 40 | WARNING | Line exceeds 80 characters; contains 83 characters
 50 | WARNING | Line exceeds 80 characters; contains 84 characters
 56 | WARNING | Line exceeds 80 characters; contains 88 characters
 58 | WARNING | Line exceeds 80 characters; contains 85 characters
 72 | WARNING | Line exceeds 80 characters; contains 83 characters
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Time: 111ms; Memory: 6.25Mb

Source: http://pareview.sh/ - PAReview.sh online service

Manual Review

Individual user account

Yes: Follows the guidelines for individual user accounts.

No duplication

Yes: Does not cause module duplication and/or fragmentation.

Master Branch

Yes: Follows the guidelines for master branch.

Licensing

Yes: Follows the licensing requirements.

3rd party assets/code

Yes: Follows the guidelines for 3rd party assets/code.

README.txt/README.md

No: Does not follow the guidelines for in-project documentation and/or the README Template. Observations:

• Readme has line-length over 80 in a few places (mentioned above in the automated test).
• Readme is poorly formatted with wrapping problems due to multiple mentions of the admin config URL. This URL should be referenced only once and not placed in the Introduction but in the Configuration section.
• The Introduction paragraph doesn't follow the rules because it delves into configuration details.
• There is a spelling error "Configuratiom" in the Introduction.
• The standard way to reference breadcrumb paths to admin pages is to separate them by " > " instead of "/". Again, I would move this out of the introduction and into the configuration section.

Code long/complex enough for review

Yes: Follows the guidelines for project length and complexity.

Secure code

Yes: Meets the security requirements.

Coding style & Drupal API usage

[List of identified issues in no particular order. Use (*) and (+) to indicate an issue importance. Replace the text below by the issues themselves:

1. In the buildForm() method of ConfigPartialExportForm.php there is a hunk of code that modifies the $change_list variable, however it is executed *after* the variable is added to the form field options/default value, thus the code appears to be useless. If, in fact, I've misread the code (entirely possible) then at minimum it would be helpful to explain via an inline code comment as to why that hunk exists where it does.
   

       if (empty($change_list)) {
         $user_input = $form_state->getUserInput();
         if (isset($user_input['change_list'])) {
           $change_list = $user_input['change_list'];
         }
       }
   

2. As mentioned in previous comments but not implemented, this modules package should be "Development" not "Configuration" in the info.yml file.
3. Your Readme mentions that this module is for developers on dev site. You may consider adding a "developer" tag into the tags section of the info.yml file, similar to the Devel module.
   

   tags:
     - developer
   

   I cannot find documentation on the tag element, so I've asked for clarification about this here.

The starred items (*) are fairly big issues and warrant going back to Needs Work. Items marked with a plus sign (+) are important and should be addressed before a stable project release. The rest of the comments in the code walkthrough are recommendations.

Overall the code seems to be written with care, so I would imagine adding these last cleanups and addressing my question above about the useless code hunk would put you in a place to be RTBC, but for now, setting back to needs work.

This review uses the Project Application Review Template.

@jwilson3: thanks for your review! Looks like you didn't find any blocking issues, anything else or can this be RTBC instead?

@Klausi, see #22 Coding style & Drupal API usage item 1. I'd at least like a response from the maintainer about this before making it RTBC, but if you dont think that's enough to block from making it RTBC, we can go ahead.

Try in console:

export GIT_SSH_COMMAND='ssh -o KexAlgorithms=+diffie-hellman-group1-sha1'

git clone http://git.drupal.org/sandbox/laszlo.kovacs/2449463.git config_partial_export

As far as I can see @laszlo.kovacs fixed all the blocking issues, so I'm going to move issue to RTBC.

Congrats! https://www.drupal.org/project/config_partial_export

Thanks for helping here Gabor! I added you to the list of active code review admins at https://groups.drupal.org/node/142454

Hm, looks like László didn't get the git vetted user role? Doing that now so that he can promote any project in the future. Then we also post this nice little promotion template from https://groups.drupal.org/node/184389#promote :

Thanks for your contribution, László!

I updated your account so you can promote this to a full project and also create new projects as either a sandbox or a "full" project.

Here are some recommended readings to help with excellent maintainership:

• Dries' post on Responsible maintainers
• Best practices for creating and maintaining projects
• Maintaining a drupal.org project with Git
• Commit messages - providing history and credit
• Release naming conventions.
• Helping maintainers in the issue queues

You can find lots more contributors chatting on IRC in #drupal-contribute. So, come hang out and stay involved!

Thanks, also, for your patience with the review process. Anyone is welcome to participate in the review process. Please consider reviewing other projects that are pending review. I encourage you to learn more about that process and join the group of reviewers.

Thanks to the dedicated reviewer(s) as well.