Closed (won't fix)
Project:
Drupal.org security advisory coverage applications
Component:
module
Priority:
Minor
Category:
Task
Assigned:
Unassigned
Reporter:
Created:
14 Aug 2024 at 20:12 UTC
Updated:
25 May 2026 at 07:48 UTC
Jump to comment: Most recent
Comments
Comment #2
vishal.kadamThank you for applying!
Please read Review process for security advisory coverage: What to expect for more details and Security advisory coverage application checklist to understand what reviewers look for. Tips for ensuring a smooth review gives some hints for a smoother review.
The important notes are the following.
phpcs --standard=Drupal,DrupalPracticeon the project, which alone fixes most of what reviewers would report.To the reviewers
Please read How to review security advisory coverage applications, Application workflow, What to cover in an application review, and Tools to use for reviews.
The important notes are the following.
For new reviewers, I would also suggest to first read In which way the issue queue for coverage applications is different from other project queues.
Comment #3
vishal.kadamComment #4
anybodyHi all, I reviewed the module code some days ago already as we planned using the module in several projects and just did a review again using https://www.drupal.org/node/1587704
I think the module is a great and couldn't find any major issues, just a little potential bug: #3468262: Wrong theme hook suggestion?
And some code style issues: #3466812: Write (basic) automated tests (I think it would be great to have these tests and further tests added once the application here as been resolved)
The module uses several Drupal API functionalities like
and is a super useful contrib extension, so clear +1 on RTBC once the code style issues have been resolved. ✅
Thank you @droath! GREAT WORK!
Comment #5
vishal.kadam1. Fix phpcs issues.
2. FILE: README.md
The module uses a README.md file instead of a README.txt file. While the Drupal coding standards have not been yet updated about that, the Drupal.org community consider that positive.
Since there is a README.md file, that should follow the content and formatting described in README.md template.
3. FILE: src/ExtraFieldTypePluginBase.php
FILE: src/ExtraFieldTypePluginManager.php
FILE: src/Form/EntityExtraFieldForm.php
FILE: src/Form/EntityExtraFieldFormDelete.php
FILE: src/Plugin/ExtraFieldType/ExtraFieldBlockPlugin.php
FILE: src/Plugin/ExtraFieldType/ExtraFieldComponentPlugin.php
FILE: src/Plugin/ExtraFieldType/ExtraFieldEntityLinkPlugin.php
The documentation comment for constructors is not mandatory anymore, If it is given, the description must be Constructs a new [class name] object. where [class name] includes the class namespace.
Comment #6
avpadernoThe project page needs to mention the existing, similar projects, such as the Extra Field module, and explain the differences between this module and the other ones.
Comment #7
rushikesh raval commentedI am changing priority as per Issue priorities.
Comment #8
avpadernoThis thread has been idle, in the needs work state with no activity for several months. Therefore, I am assuming that you are no longer pursuing this application.
May you confirm you are still pursuing this application? If this is the case, and you made commits basing on what previously reported, or you can answer the questions previously asked, please change the status to Needs review.
Comment #9
avpadernoThis thread has been idle, in the Needs work state with no activity for about eight months or more; the application has been created about 11 months ago or more. Therefore, I marked it as Closed (won't fix).
If this is incorrect, and you are still pursuing this application, please feel free to re-open it and set the issue status to Needs work or Needs review, depending on the current status of your code.
Comment #11
droath commentedI would like to reopen this ticket to enable the security advisory for the Entity Extra Field Drupal module. I have made the necessary changes based on what was defined above. The module now has a fully implemented test suite to ensure that the Drupal module code remains in line with Drupal coding standards as we continue to maintain and add new features.
https://git.drupalcode.org/project/entity_extra_field/-/pipelines
The Drupal community has begun compiling a comparison base to determine where entity extra fields fit, in order to understand when you might want to use the entity extra field module over other solutions.
https://www.drupal.org/project/entity_extra_field/issues/3198145
Comment #12
droath commentedComment #13
avpadernoJust a clarification: That project is already covered by the security advisory policy, but these applications do not opt projects into security advisory coverage; they give to the person who applies the permission to opt projects into security advisory coverage.
The project is used just to verify how much the person who applies understands about writing secure code which follows the Drupal coding standards and correctly uses the Drupal API. That is why one of the requirements is that most (but preferably all) the commits are done by the person who applies.
What reported in comment #6 has not been done: The project page still does not mention the existing, similar projects.
Comment #14
anybodyThanks @droath - I recently checked the project into SA. Please follow the steps mentioned here for your personal permissions :)
Let me know if I can help.
Comment #15
avpadernoSee also comment #2: Until this application is not closed as Fixed, the only allowed commits need to be done by the person who created the application.
These applications do not aim to understand what the project maintainers as group understand about writing secure code which follows the Drupal coding standards and correctly uses the Drupal API. They aims to understand what the person who applied understands about those topics.
Comment #16
droath commented@anybody
I need to understand the steps necessary to obtain my personal permissions. Since I initially wrote the module and it is currently being developed by the Drupal community, I can work on updating the project page. Is that the only outstanding issue until I can be provided security clearance?
Comment #17
avpadernoA review has been done in comment #5. I just pointed out that the project needs to be updated to contain the information I gave in comment #6.
Comment #18
avpadernoAnyway, since there are commits from other maintainers, the project no longer can be used by droath for this application.
Comment #19
avpadernoThis thread has been idle, in the Needs work state with no activity for about six months or more; the application has been created about 11 months ago or more. Therefore, I marked it as Closed (won't fix).