[D7] Phoneword

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.

I like it. Phone numbers are always easier to remember as word.

Very straightforward code example for review.

Licensing looks good. Individual user account. Style and spacing looks good as well. It does what it's supposed to do, looks good. No 3rd party assets/code. Just hits the recommended 5 functions for minimum code length.

Marking as Reviewed & tested by the community.

Hi,
I found some problems:
1. Implement hook_uninstall() and delete the variables set in module(use variable_del());
2. Use Drupal.behaviors instead of $(document).ready().

Hi @inteja,

Thanks for your contribution
I found some issues

1. $phoneword_tooltip = variable_get('phoneword_tooltip', 'Click to call us'); use t() function for strings
2.

phoneword_wrapper' => array(
        '#prefix' => '<div id="phoneword-wrapper"><a href="tel:' . $phoneword_link . '" title="' . $phoneword_tooltip . '"><div id="phonewords">',

can't we use l() instead of .

Automated Review

Review of the 7.x-1.x branch (commit 747d335):

No automated test cases were found, did you consider writing Simpletests or PHPUnit tests? This is not a requirement but encouraged for professional software development.

Note that perfect adherence to Drupal Coding Standard is NOT a reason to block an application, except for total disregard of them. However, modules should follow them as closely as possible.

Manual Review

Individual user account

Yes: Follows the guidelines for individual user accounts.

No duplication

No: Causes module duplication and/or fragmentation.

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.

README.txt/README.md

Yes: Follows the guidelines for in-project documentation and/or the README Template.

Code long/complex enough for review

Yes: Follows the guidelines for project length and complexity.

Secure code

Yes: Meets the security requirements.

Coding style & Drupal API usage

[List of identified issues in no particular order. Use (*) and (+) to indicate an issue importance. Replace the text below by the issues themselves:

1. (*) Nothing
2. (+) It would be good, if you implement hook_permission in your module.
3. Just a recommendation

Use more comments on module file.

The starred items (*) are fairly big issues and warrant going back to Needs Work. Items marked with a plus sign (+) are important and should be addressed before a stable project release. The rest of the comments in the code walkthrough are recommendations.

If added, please don't remove the security tag, we keep that for statistics and to show examples of security problems.

This review uses the Project Application Review Template.

This module has security issues in it. You accept user input but don't filter it.

@mlhess we use this tag to track security issues in project applications.

Could you also be a bit more specific so that the applicants know where exactly they need to fix something?

Hello, I have installed and tested the functionality of the module. It works well and does not cause errors or failures. Your module is quite efficient and can be used at various sites. Thanks.

@romanblanyar: looks like you forgot to change the status? I this now RTBC after your code review or are there any blockers left?

reviewing this module

<a href="tel:' . $phoneword_link . '" title="' . $phoneword_tooltip . '"> Needs to be wrapped in l() function.

Javascript coding standard for Drupal 7 module is missing in JS file.

(function ($) {
  'use strict';

  Drupal.behaviors.phoneword = {
    attach: function (context, settings) {

      // Get settings.
      var element = settings.phoneword.element;
      var fadeInterval = settings.phoneword.fadeInterval;
      var fadeDuration = settings.phoneword.fadeDuration;

@inteja, This is how you can optimize your code to use l().

Example:

$phoneword_link = '12343455';
  $phoneword_tooltip = '434455text';
  $options = array(
                        'attributes' => array (
                            'class' => 'phonewords',
                            'id' => 'phonewords',
                            'title' => $phoneword_tooltip,
                        ),
                    );
 l('phonewords', 'tel:' . $phoneword_link, $options);

For JS, commenting is very important thats why I have added JS link in #22

Follow #2183405: [Obsolete] JavaScript API documentation and comment standards and see the example for the coding standard.

/**
 * Attaches the table drag behavior to tables.
 *
 * @type {Drupal~behavior}
 * 
 * @prop {Drupal~behaviorAttach} attach
 *   Specific description of this attach function goes here.
 * @prop {Drupal~behaviorDetach} detach
 *   Specific description of this detach function goes here.
 */
Drupal.behaviors.tableDrag = {
  attach: function (context, settings) {
    // ...
  },
  detach: function (context, settings, trigger) {
    // …
  }
};

@inteja, Fantastic, I will review your changes.

I understand your concerns, But now it is more good approach. give a clear documentation to end module user so if they want to add they can.
For hovering effect you can add css for outer div??

There are some errors reported by automated review tools, did you already check them? See http://pareview.sh/pareview/httpgitdrupalorgsandboxinteja2633760git

I'm a robot and this is an automated message from Project Applications Scraper.

I see very simple issue the the phone word is overlapping phone no.

And there is no animation.

If you this is happening because of l('phonewords', 'tel:' . $phoneword_link, $options); implemented. Please mentioned clearly in the description of the issue and take this to that old stage. So community can review your module.

Hi inteja,

Please add validation to the link field. Right now it is accepting even alphabets. Please refer to screenshot attached.

Thanks,
Sarah.

I guess you have not fixed all coding standard issue, you missed this one http://pareview.sh/pareview/httpgitdrupalorgsandboxinteja2633760git.

Minor coding standard issues are surely not application blockers, anything else that you found or should this be RTBC instead?

Appears to be passing all automated tests

http://pareview.sh/pareview/httpgitdrupalorgsandboxinteja2633760git-7x-1x

Manual Review

Individual user account

[Yes: Follows ] the guidelines for individual user accounts.

No duplication

[Yes: Does not cause] module duplication and/or fragmentation.

Master Branch

[Yes: Follows] the guidelines for master branch.

README.txt

[Yes: Follows] the guidelines for in-project documentation and/or the README Template.

Secure code

[Yes: Meets the security requirements]

inteja, please don't remove PAReview: security - they are kept even after it is fixed.

With that said:

Thanks for your contribution, inteja!

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.