[D7] Super Monitoring

There are some errors reported by automated review tools, did you already check them? See http://pareview.sh/pareview/httpgitdrupalorgsandboxDeancraft2429027git

We 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.

Can you try like this:

/**
* @file
* Super Monitoring.
*/

function supermonitor(..)

Automated Review

Look at http://pareview.sh/pareview/httpgitdrupalorgsandboxDeancraft2429027git to get errors and warnings fixed

Manual Review

In the supermonitoring.install you are rigth track in line 12: $t = get_t()
but you miss to make use of it in line 14 ... l(t('Administer > ...

I would suggest to use system_settings_form in admin settings.

I tried to get a free account, but was not abel to identify the correct token to insert into the admin interface.
I would be great if the desccription of the admin interface tells where to find the token on the website.

Individual user account
Yes: Follows the guidelines for individual user accounts.
No duplication
Yes: Does not cause module duplication and/or fragmentation.
These modules do a different job:
https://www.drupal.org/project/monitoring
https://www.drupal.org/project/performance

Master Branch
Yes: Follows the guidelines for master branch.
Licensing
Yes: Follows the licensing requirements.
3rd party assets/code
Yes: Follows the guidelines for 3rd party assets/code. No 3rd party code inside.
README.txt/README.md
Yes: Follows the guidelines for in-project documentation and/or the README Template.
Secure code
Yes: Meets the security requirements.

Automatic review

No errors found

Manual review

Just a little optimisation :

/**
 * View for services.
 */

Add @return to this block

/**
 * View for setting.
 */

Add @return to this block

/**
 * View for contacts.
 */

Add @return to this block

Hello,

A nice module your doing here, i looked around and i have a small note:
In the supermonitoring.admin.inc file under supermonitoring_settings_form() function, why don't you use return system_settings_form($form); instead of

$form['submit'] = array(
    '#type' => 'submit',
    '#value' => t('Submit'),
  );

  return $form;

i mean you can do this instead:

/**
 * Implements supermonitoring_settings_form().
 */
function supermonitoring_settings_form($form, &$form_state) {

  $form = array();

  $form['token'] = array(
    '#type' => 'textfield',
    '#title' => t('Authorization token'),
    '#size' => 100,
    '#description' => t('If you already have a subscription at www.supermonitoring.com, enter your token to integrate the service with WordPress panel.<br><br>If you have not an account at www.supermonitoring.com yet, sign up here for a 14-day free trial.'),
    '#default_value' => variable_get('supermonitoring_token'),
  );

  return system_settings_form($form);
}

And in this case you can remove supermonitoring_settings_form_submit() function as it will be no need for it, the return system_settings_form($form); will handle the variables for you and set it in the DB.

Please check https://api.drupal.org/api/drupal/modules!system!system.module/function/system_settings_form/7

Also another note, i think it's more recommended to make your own permission for the module using hook_permission() but it's up to you.

Good luck

That seem to be improvements, but not application blockers. Anything else that you found or should this be RTBC instead?

RTBC = Reviewed & tested by the community

HI Deancraft,

Now you need to wait until someone who is a "git administrator" approves this project.

This can take quite a long time (sometimes months) unless you chip in and review three other projects that are in the application queue. Once you do this, put a list of these three reviews in the summary of your issue here, and add the "PAReview: review bonus" tag to the issue. That puts you in the priority queue for approval.

You can read more about the application process here: https://www.drupal.org/node/1011698
You can read more about the review bonus process here: https://www.drupal.org/node/1975228

Changing priority back to normal - I don't see how this is a critical issue.

You should reference 3 reviews in the issue summary of your own application issue. You can do this by editing the first post (the issue summary) of your project application issue. Then create a new section called "Manual reviews of other projects" and add the links to the exact review comment in the reviews you have done, e.g. like this one http://drupal.org/node/1381726#comment-5418942

For more details, see the Review bonus.

Thanks for your contribution!

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:

• Dries' post on Responsible maintainers
• Best practices for creating and maintaining projects
• Maintaining a drupal.org project with Git
• Commit messages - providing history and credit
• Release naming conventions.
• Helping maintainers in the issue queues

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.