[D8] Branchee Block

There are some errors reported by automated review tools, did you already check them? See http://pareview.sh/pareview/httpsgitdrupalorgsandboxaeotrin2753955git

Fixed the git clone URL in the issue summary for non-maintainer users.

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.

Manual Review:

• *Blocker: According to description in info file, I navigate to /admin/structure/block and choosed *Branchee Menu Block* and press `Place Block` but, it does not work even after clear cache.
• You need to escape * asterisk in your README.md Markdown file. e.g.: **Place Block** should correct by \*\*Place Block\*\*. For more information take a look at
  https://confluence.atlassian.com/bitbucketserver/markdown-syntax-guide-7...
• in branchee_block.info.yml please put your module under `User interface` not Custom.
  package: User interface
• Consider using OOP like using
  \Drupal::entityManager()->getStorage($entity_type) instead of `entity_load_multiple` In branchee_block/src/Plugin/Block/BrancheeMenuBlock.php
• In branchee_block/src/Plugin/Block/BrancheeMenuBlock.php line 38,39,40 Consider using [] instead of array()

• Consider creating a composer.json file.

  {
    "name": "drupal/test",
    "type": "drupal-module",
    "description": "My Awesome Module",
    "keywords": ["Drupal"],
    "license": "GPL-2.0+",
    "homepage": "https://www.drupal.org/project/test",
    "minimum-stability": "dev",
    "support": {
      "issues": "http://drupal.org/project/issues/test",
      "source": "http://cgit.drupalcode.org/test"
    },
    "require": { }
  }

• There are some warning in coding standard, Please go through the below pareview.sh URL
  http://pareview.sh/pareview/httpsgitdrupalorgsandboxaeotrin2753955git

For `t()` ignore those warnings.
For dependency injection warning you can fix it by injecting `menu.link_tree` in your create() and __construct() function then you have $this->container->get('menu.link_tree').

  /**
   * The menu link tree service.
   *
   * @var \Drupal\Core\Menu\MenuLinkTreeInterface
   */
  protected $menuLinkTree;

  public function __construct(array $configuration, $plugin_id, $plugin_definition, ConfigFactoryInterface $link_tree) {
    parent::__construct($configuration, $plugin_id, $plugin_definition);
    $this->menuLinkTree = $menu_link_tree;
  }

  /**
   * {@inheritdoc}
   */
  public static function create(ContainerInterface $container, array $configuration, $plugin_id, $plugin_definition) {
    return new static(
      $configuration,
      $plugin_id,
      $plugin_definition,
      $container->get(''menu.link_tree''),
    );
  }

use Drupal\Core\Menu\MenuLinkTreeInterface;
For more code styling tips:
in branchee_block/src/Plugin/Block/BrancheeMenuBlock.php
line 69
Consider `return $form;` is in the condition and you need to return array in anycase.
and PHPdoc on top of file should be just before class definition not at first line of file.

PS. if you'd like have a review on my project:
https://www.drupal.org/node/2758935

Review your module with https://pareview.sh/. You will see that you have a lot of coding standards errors, you should use dependency injection in classes etc. I didn't attach because review from pareview.sh because it is really long.

Automated Review

https://pareview.sh/node/767 Found some warnings and an error, but those aren't big problems.

Note that perfect adherence to Drupal Coding Standard is NOT a reason to block an application, except for total disregard of them. However, modules should follow them as closely as possible.

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

Yes: Follows the guidelines for in-project documentation and/or the README Template.

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

1. You should fix those dependency injection warnings, because you already use dependency injection in BrancheeMenuBlock.php. So it should not be a problem.

Otherwise everything works fine

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.

If added, please don't remove the security tag, we keep that for statistics and to show examples of security problems.

This review uses the Project Application Review Template.

Thank you for your contribution!

I updated your account so you can opt into security advisory coverage now.

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!

Thank you, 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 go the dedicated reviewer(s) as well.