This is a simple plugin that can be used to monitor Drupal updates with Zabbix. This makes sure that your Drupal sites aren't running with an outdated core or outdated modules.
4 URIs are available for monitoring:
/zabbix-monitoring/updates/core/warning
/zabbix-monitoring/updates/core/critical
/zabbix-monitoring/updates/modules/warning
/zabbix-monitoring/updates/modules/critical
This specific URL structure was chosen with Zabbix web checks in mind, having 4 seperate URL's makes adding the various web checks to Zabbix, each with their own severity, very easy.
This is different compared to other monitoring plugins because it's created with Zabbix in mind, that's why we chose the (somewhat crude) approach of adding 4 seperate URLs and using basic auth.
Project page:
https://www.drupal.org/sandbox/enrise/2415783
Git clone command:
git clone --branch 7.x-1.x http://git.drupal.org/sandbox/enrise/2415783.git zabbix_monitoring
Comments
Comment #1
k_zoltan commentedPlease have a look at the coding standard issues presented here:
http://pareview.sh/pareview/httpgitdrupalorgsandboxenrise2415783git
Comment #2
CodeCuisine commentedOh sure, I'll go and fix it :)
Should have done that to begin with, my bad!
Comment #3
CodeCuisine commentedAll done now, please have a look again =)
http://pareview.sh/pareview/httpgitdrupalorgsandboxenrise2415783git
There aren't any unit tests because the module is so small.
If the need arises, I will add them of course.
Comment #4
PA robot commentedWe are currently quite busy with all the project applications and we prefer projects with a review bonus. Please help reviewing and put yourself on the high priority list, then we will take a look at your project right away :-)
Also, you should get your friends, colleagues or other community members involved to review this application. Let them go through the review checklist and post a comment that sets this issue to "needs work" (they found some problems with the project) or "reviewed & tested by the community" (they found no major flaws).
I'm a robot and this is an automated message from Project Applications Scraper.
Comment #5
arijits.drushManual Review
Individual user account
Yes: Follows
No duplication
Yes: Does not cause
Master Branch
Yes: Follows
Licensing
Yes: Follows
3rd party assets/code
Yes: Follows
README.txt/README.md
No: Does not follow You should improve your project page, you can do it following Project page template an image will be helpful . Also update your README.txt file using Readme template
Code long/complex enough for review
Yes: Follows
Secure code
Yes: Meets the security requirements.
Coding style & Drupal API usage
Just a recommendation : @file block missing for zabbix_monitoring.module
This review uses the Project Application Review Template.
Comment #6
CodeCuisine commentedHi,
thanks for the manual review. I've updated both the project page and the README.md.
Even managed to squeeze in a Zabbix Monitoring logo as well :-)
Please have a look and let me know what I need to change (if any) to make this project jump from the sandbox into a real project.
Comment #7
CodeCuisine commentedComment #8
CodeCuisine commentedSubtle poke. Only had to change the README and homepage, which I did, so it should be very little effort to push this out of the sandbox now :)
Comment #9
k_zoltan commentedGreat job.
There is only one more step that is advised to do. That is described as "Review bonus".
This is not mandatory but advised since this way your module will get approved faster.
For more info see https://www.drupal.org/node/1975228
TL;DR
The goal is to get on this list: PAReview: review bonus list
After that isn't just the matter of days.
Good luck.
Comment #10
ruscoe commentedFollowing the Project Application Checklist:
1.1: Repository and project page
Project page and repository look good.
- https://www.drupal.org/sandbox/enrise/2415783
- http://cgit.drupalcode.org/sandbox-enrise-2415783
1.2: Duplication
There is already a Zabbix integration for Drupal. Does this module provide any different functionality?
2.1: Code length
Repository contains a suitable amount of code for review.
3.1: Security issues
No security issues are apparent, but one suggestion:
- On the Zabbix Monitoring configration page, changing the password field type from 'textfield' to 'password' would automatically obscure the password, making the field consistant with other password fields in Drupal.
4.1: Licensing
Repository does not contain a LICENSE.txt file.
4.2: Licensing (GPL)
Repository does not appear to contain any third party, non-GPL code.
5.1: Documentation (Project page)
Project page contains a detailed description of the module functionality.
5.2: Documentation (README)
Repository contains a suitably detailed README.md file.
5.3: Documentation (inline comments)
The zabbix_monitoring_updates() function would benefit from some inline comments explaining the functionality.
6.1: Coding standards and style
An automated review identifies a couple of documentation issues. Results here.
Not a blocker, but the access validation you're doing in zabbix_monitoring_updates() would be clearer if it were moved into a custom access callback.
This can be marked as RTBC if it does not duplicate functionality provided by the Zabbix module.
Comment #11
klausiModule duplication can be bad but is not an application blocker. Anything else that you found or should this be RTBC instead?
Comment #12
ruscoe commentedDuplication was the only issue I found. This can be RTBC.
Comment #13
damienmckennaThanks for your contribution, CodeCuisine!
I updated your account so you can promote this to a full project and also create new projects as either a sandbox or a "full" project.
Here are some recommended readings to help with excellent maintainership:
You can find lots more contributors chatting on 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.