Needs review
Project:
Drupal.org security advisory coverage applications
Component:
module
Priority:
Normal
Category:
Task
Assigned:
Unassigned
Reporter:
Created:
27 Sep 2026 at 13:37 UTC
Updated:
1 Oct 2026 at 10:28 UTC
Jump to comment: Most recent
Comments
Comment #2
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 #3
vishal.kadam1. main is acceptable as branch name, but it is not yet fully supported on drupal.org.
With contributed projects, it is still not possible to create an issue for the main branch. For projects used in these applications, for which is still suggested to work with release-specific branches, it should be better to avoid using a branch with that name.
2. FILE: README.md
The README file is missing the required sections - Requirements, Installation and Configuration.
3. FILE: teya_payment.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.
4. FILE: src/Controller/TeyaRegistrationController.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.Comment #4
webensol commentedThanks for the review, I have addressed the feedback.
Changes made:
1. Created/pushed the release branch `1.0.x` instead of using `main`.
2. Updated README.md with the required Requirements, Installation, and Configuration sections.
3. Moved hook logic into an OO hook class and kept only legacy hook shims in `teya_payment.module`.
4. Updated `TeyaRegistrationController` to implement `ContainerInjectionInterface` directly instead of extending `ControllerBase`.
Branch: https://git.drupalcode.org/project/teya_payment/-/tree/1.0.x
Setting back to Needs review.
Comment #5
vishal.kadam