[1.0.x] Labour code widgets

Thank 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.

• If you have not done it yet, you should run phpcs --standard=Drupal,DrupalPractice on the project, which alone fixes most of what reviewers would report.
• For the time this application is open, only your commits are allowed.
• The purpose of this application is giving you a new drupal.org role that allows you to opt projects into security advisory coverage, either projects you already created, or projects you will create. The project status won't be changed by this application and no other user will be able to opt projects into security advisory policy.
• We only accept an application per user. If you change your mind about the project to use for this application, or it is necessary to use a different project for the application, please update the issue summary with the link to the correct project and the issue title with the project name and the branch to review.

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.

• It is preferable to wait for a Code Review Administrator before commenting on newly created applications. Code Review Administrators will do some preliminary checks that are necessary before any change on the project files is suggested.
• Reviewers should show the output of a CLI tool → only once per application.
• It may be best to have the applicant fix things before further review.

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 → .

main is a wrong branch name, as branch names end with the literal .x. That branch needs to be removed.

Drupal core will use the main branch, once drupal.org fixes all the issues regarding that branch. It is the master branch that projects should not use.

@vishal.kadam The wait for a Code Review Administrator before commenting on newly created applications part you wrote in your comment holds true for you too.

Thank you for your reply.
I've created a new branch 1.0.x which is my default one.

PHPCS with Drupal and DrupalPractice standard linters have been run successfully.

• What follows is a quick review of the project; it doesn't mean to be complete
• For each point, the review usually shows some lines that should be fixed (except in the case the point is about the full content of a file); it doesn't show all the lines that need to be changed for the same reason
• A review is about code that doesn't follow the coding standards, contains possible security issue, or doesn't correctly use the Drupal API; the single points aren't ordered, not even by importance

core_version_requirement: ^8.8 || ^9 || ^10

Since the module declares to need any Drupal 8 or Drupal 9 version, it cannot use features implemented by PHP 7.4, as Drupal 8 nor Drupal 9 require PHP 7.4. Either the minimum Drupal version is increased to Drupal 9.4 or the module explicitly requires PHP 7.4.

I am changing priority as per Issue priorities → .

I apologize for the long delay.
I've fixed PHP version for the module.

Thank you for your contribution!
I updated your account so you can now opt into security advisory coverage for any project you created and every project you will create.

These are some recommended readings to help you with maintainership:

• Dries → ' post on Responsible maintainers
• Maintainership →
• Git version control system →
• Issue procedures and etiquette →
• Maintaining and responding to issues for a project →
• Release naming conventions → .

You can find more contributors chatting on Slack → or IRC → in #drupal-contribute. So, come hang out and stay involved → !

Thank you 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.

I thank also the dedicated reviewers as well.

Automatically closed - issue fixed for 2 weeks with no activity.