Closed (fixed)
Project:
Drupal.org security advisory coverage applications
Component:
module
Priority:
Critical
Category:
Task
Assigned:
Unassigned
Issue tags:
Reporter:
Created:
11 Sep 2024 at 11:17 UTC
Updated:
8 Feb 2025 at 17:34 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
avpadernoThis is quick review. I will do a more complete one when I have more time.
src/Form/PageCacheExclusionConfigForm.php
There is no need to call
$this->configFactory->getEditable(). It is sufficient to call$this->config().$config->set()returns the configuration object, so multiple calls toset()can be chained.src/StackMiddleware/PageCacheAlter.php
{@inheritdoc}is not used for class constructors.core/modules/page_cache/src/StackMiddleware/PageCache.php
Stack middleware implementations done by Drupal core and its modules are internal API. Classes like
Drupal\page_cache\StackMiddleware\PageCachecannot be used as parent class.Comment #5
joseph28 commentedhello @avpaderno,
Thank you for taking the time to review the module.
I corrected the points mentioned in your comment except:
I am not sure I understand what's the problem nor the alternative.
Correct me if I am wrong but for me the purpose of the contrib modules is to extend core functionnalities, also I did find many modules extending PageCache ( ex: Advanced Internal Page Cache)
Comment #6
avpadernoThe problem is that backward-compatibility changes are only done for public API.
There is just an alternative: Extend only classes that are part of the public API, like base classes.
Comment #7
joseph28 commentedhello @avpaderno,
Ok I get your point and as I see we have 2 solutions:
- Implement HttpKernelInterface instead of extending PageCache but this will lead to redefining the entire pageCache class in our new class
- Use a service instead of a StackMiddleware but this beats the purpose of the module because we are trying to do it without bootstraping drupal
Can you give us your opinion on these 2 solutions?
Do you see other possibilities?
Comment #8
rushikesh raval commentedI am changing priority as per Issue priorities.
Comment #9
rushikesh raval commentedI am changing priority as per Issue priorities.
Comment #10
joseph28 commentedHello @avpaderno,
Can you please check out my previous comment?
Comment #11
klausimanual review:
Otherwise looks good to me.
Thanks for your contribution, Joseph!
I updated your account so you can opt into security advisory coverage now.
Here are some recommended readings to help with excellent maintainership:
You can find lots more contributors chatting on Slack or 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.