Needs review
Project:
Drupal.org security advisory coverage applications
Component:
module
Priority:
Normal
Category:
Task
Assigned:
Unassigned
Reporter:
Created:
28 Apr 2026 at 14:06 UTC
Updated:
23 May 2026 at 17:01 UTC
Jump to comment: Most recent
Comments
Comment #2
dkmishra commentedComment #3
vishal.kadamComment #4
avpadernoThank you for applying!
Before giving links helpful to understand how the review process works, what to expect from a review, and what to do to avoid a review takes more time than needed, I would like to thank all the reviewers for the work they do.
These applications are volunters-driven, which also means it is not possible to predict when an application will be marked fixed and the applicant will get the permission to opt projects into security advisory policy. While we aim to make an application as quick as possible, it is also important for us that more people review the project used for an application. In this way, we make sure applications do not miss some important points that should be instead reported.
Applications are not meant to be complete debugging sessions that eliminate every existing bug, though. I apologize if sometimes applications seem to go into too-detailed reviews.
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.
Keep in mind that once the project is opted into security advisory coverage, only Security Team members may change coverage.
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 #5
vishal.kadam1. FILE: vote_anon.module
For a new module that aims to be compatible with Drupal 10 and Drupal 11, I would rather implement hooks as class methods as described in Support for object oriented hook implementations using autowired services.
It would require increasing the minimum Drupal 10 version supported, but Drupal 10.1 is no longer supported.
2. FILE: README.txt
Remove README.txt since README.md is already present.
3. FILE: src/Controller/SingleNodeVoteAjaxController.php
FILE: src/Controller/VoteAjaxController.php
FILE: src/Form/VoteConfigurationForm.php
New modules, which are compatible with Drupal 10 and higher versions are expected to use constructor property promotion.
4. FILE: src/Form/VoteConfigurationForm.php
With Drupal 10 and Drupal 11, there is no longer need to use #default_value for each form element, when the parent class is ConfigFormBase: It is sufficient to use #config_target, as in the following code.
Using that code, it is no longer needed to save the configuration values in the form submission handler: The parent class will take care of that.
For this change, it is necessary to require at least Drupal 10.3, but that is not an issue, since Drupal 10.2.x is no longer supported.
Comment #6
dkmishra commentedThank you for your feedback. I will work on resolving these issues and update you accordingly.
Comment #7
dkmishra commentedAll the mentioned issues have been fixed — coding standards, prettier formatting, and docblock corrections. Please review.
Comment #8
vishal.kadamAdd .module file
Since the module is declared compatible with Drupal 10.3, removing the function implementing the hook is not possible. The function still needs to be defined, but it calls the method defined by the service class, as described in Support for object oriented hook implementations using autowired services (Backwards-compatible Hook implementation for Drupal versions from 10.1 to 11.0).
Comment #9
avpadernoThe project is using a master branch.
You should really be working in a release specific branch. The most direct documentation on this is Moving from a master branch to a version branch. For additional resources please see the documentation about release naming conventions and creating a branch in git.
Since the module is declared compatible with Drupal 10.3, removing the function implementing the hook is not possible.
The function still needs to be defined, but it calls the method defined by the service class, as described in Support for object oriented hook implementations using autowired services / Backwards-compatible Hook implementation for Drupal versions from 10.1 to 11.0.
src/Controller/SingleNodeVoteAjaxController.php
Since that class does not use methods from the parent class, or it uses a single method from the parent class, it does not need to use
ControllerBaseas parent class.Controllers do not need to have a parent class; as long as they implement
\Drupal\Core\DependencyInjection\ContainerInjectionInterface, they are fine.The documentation comment for the constructor is no longer mandatory; if it added, its short description should be Constructs a new [class name] instance. or Constructs a new [class name] object. where [class name] is the name of the class, including its namespace.
Documentation comments for methods and functions need to also document parameters and return value, if there is any.
As per Drupal coding standards, only a single space is used before and after the assignment operator (and other operators too).
Strings shown in the user interface must be translatable.
Configuration object values are translatable if the module define its schema and has a .config_translation.yml file which says which of the values in a configuration form are translatable. See user.config_translation.yml or
system.config_translation.yml as example of .config_translation.yml files used by Drupal core.
src/Form/VoteConfigurationForm.php
'#description' => $this->t('Allowed characters: <code>A-Z a-z 0-9 _ -'),It is probably better to say Only letters, numbers, hyphens, and underscores are allowed. like the error message does.
A-Z a-z 0-9 _ -is probably not clear to many people.Comment #10
avpadernoProjects like Fivestar already allow anonymous votes. Why did you decide to create a new project instead of joining forces with that project?
Comment #11
dkmishra commentedThank you for the feedback. I created Vote Anon because my goal is different from Fivestar’s use case. Fivestar is mainly focused on rating-style voting widgets, while Vote Anon is intended to provide a lightweight and reusable anonymous voting mechanism that can be integrated independently of rating UIs.
-No star ratings — just a simple single-click vote
-No dependencies on third-party rating libraries
-Cookie- and session-based tracking without requiring user accounts
I have addressed all the feedback points. Please review again.
Comment #12
avpadernoThat is information the project page should give.
Comment #13
dkmishra commentedThank you for the suggestion. I have updated the project page description to clearly explain the use case and how it differs from other voting modules.
Comment #14
dkmishra commentedPlease let me know if need any other change.