Closed (won't fix)
Project:
Drupal.org security advisory coverage applications
Component:
theme
Priority:
Normal
Category:
Task
Assigned:
Unassigned
Reporter:
Created:
23 Nov 2016 at 05:46 UTC
Updated:
13 Nov 2018 at 12:19 UTC
Jump to comment: Most recent, Most recent file
Comments
Comment #2
PA robot commentedFixed the git clone URL in the issue summary for non-maintainer users.
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.
Comment #3
sandip27 commentedHello @drupalfever
I did the automated test for the module and found bunch of issues. Those can be seen at pareview Review.
EDIT: removed long pareview.sh dump.
Please take care of those issues.
Thanks
Comment #4
PA robot commentedClosing due to lack of activity. If you are still working on this application, you should fix all known problems and then set the status to "Needs review". (See also the project application workflow).
I'm a robot and this is an automated message from Project Applications Scraper.
Comment #5
drupalfever commentedI fixed all the errors that I could. I am talking about the errors described by sandip27.
There is only one error that I didn't understand. I would appreciate any help.
The error that I didn't understand is as follows:
Comment #6
drupalfever commentedI just fixed all the errors found at PAReview.
https://pareview.sh/node/404
There are no errors. There is only one warning that I simply don't understand:
Since this is not an error but just a warning, I think that my theme should be approved.
In any case, if anyone can give me a clue as to what the error message is talking about, I will gladly fix the warning as well.
Following is the code that the warning is complaining about. The following code starts at line 114 of my "dfrspnsv.theme" file:
Comment #7
Andre-BHello,
The comment is the issue here, the form for hook implementations must be Implements HOOK. (nothing following on that line)
So fix for that notice is as easy as:
This is an issue for the following examples:
Continued manual review:
1) Good balance of inline comments and code in .theme file.

2) Detailed comments in twig files about available variables etc. - nice.
3) Some more inline comments in css files would be nice.
4) referencing of core assets needs to be done differently - not all themes need to be installed in themes/ directly same goes for modules. Any subfolder logic can be applied - if that's the case referencing like
background: url(../../../../misc/icons/000000/chevron-left.svg)will cause 404s. See more examples in the screenshot attached.Comment #8
Andre-BComment #9
Andre-BI don't see blockers here.
Comment #10
drupalfever commentedHello, Andre-B! Thanks for the great amount of time spent on evaluating my theme.
Great stuff there. I will take my time going over all your suggestions.
Once again, I appreciate all your help!
Comment #11
drupalfever commentedHello, Andre-B! Thanks to you, my code is now passing the PAReview.sh test with flying colors!
https://pareview.sh/node/1203
By the way, just altering the comment to what you suggested did not work:
I had to remove any other comment. I could only leave the "Implements hook_" line:
With regards to your CSS suggestion, I do not know how I could address the problem of referencing to images in any other way.
I would be forever thankful :) if you could give me any suggestion.
Comment #12
trangunghoa commentedHey @drupalfever,
I used command: git clone --branch 8.x-1.x https://git.drupal.org/sandbox/drupalfever/2829859.git dfrspnsv
and there are my results:
Automated Review
https://pareview.sh/node/404
I just saw one error for your files.
"End of line character is invalid; expected "\n" but
| | found "\r\n""
Because you used the style default by the window.
Manual Review
Individual user accounts
No
No duplication
No, Not sure, but I think it's duplication by the Bartik themes, please explain to me.
Master Branch
Yes.
Licensing
Yes.
3rd party assets/code
Yes.
README.txt/README.md
Yes.
Code long/complex enough for review
Yes.
Secure code
Yes
Comment #13
trangunghoa commentedComment #14
drupalfever commentedHi, trangunghoa! Thanks for reviewing my theme.
As I said before, the PAReview.sh site does not show any error. I just followed the link that you shared with me in your comment and it is no complaining about anything.
https://pareview.sh/node/404
If there was a problem with line-breaks with \r\n instead of \n, I think that PAReview.sh would have complained about it, right?
I have noticed that you are using a different code reviewing software. I opened the text file that you shared with your report and will see what I can do about these warnings.
dfrspnsv-drupalcs-result.txt
I have noticed that you are having second thoughts about the originality of my theme. You are absolutely right! In fact, I based my theme on the Bartik theme. I had to start somewhere and I didn't want to start a new theme from scratch.
I like the Bartik theme! However, I was quite disappointed when I decided to use this theme for one of my clients. I didn't like how the website behaved when viewed by mobile devices. I thought that the breakpoints were set in a weird place. In my point of view, the mobile friendliness of the theme was beyond practical use.
As a result, I spent an inordinate amount of time tweaking the CSS and template files. I finally got the theme to a point where I felt happy with the final result. I have been using this customized theme ever since.
That's when I decided that it was time to share the fruit of my labor with the rest of the community. So, here we are! :)
Once again, I would like to thank you for taking the time to review my theme. I appreciate it. It means a lot to me!
Comment #15
drupalfever commentedHi, trangunghoa! I managed to edit the following file:
I have replaced the "\r\n" with "\n".
Would you mind checking my files once again?
Comment #16
Andre-BHello,
On pareview is a retry button: https://pareview.sh/node/404
Its down to two notices, regarding the core assets- you should be able to reference them starting from the root directory like '/misc...' (I am on my mobile right now so cant check the correct path)
Comment #17
trangunghoa commentedHi drupalfever,
I didn't see anything change, maybe you didn't submit the change.
For your module I think you should get another UI instead of Bartik because it does not make much sense.
I know you have spent much time to change the CSS and layout, but users will check the UI first.
Comment #18
PA robot commentedThere are some errors reported by automated review tools, did you already check them? See http://pareview.sh/pareview/httpsgitdrupalorgsandboxdrupalfever2829859git
I'm a robot and this is an automated message from Project Applications Scraper.
Comment #19
drupalfever commentedHi, trangunghoa!
I made changes on my GIT configuration and on my Eclipse PDT configuration so they don't add \r\n to my files anymore. I also forced GIT to update the aforementioned files. I believe that you will be able to see the changes now.
I apologist but I did not understand your statement. What does not make sense? Well, I think that the Bartik UI is really good. I don't want to make changes to a part of the theme that was well designed. My goal was to build upon what was already a good theme.
I am not trying to hide the fact that my theme was based on Bartik. In fact, I think that this is an asset. Users will feel right at home using my modified theme since the Bartik theme is so popular.
I am not sure if you understand the spirit of my intentions when I decided to submit this theme. As the description of this theme states, this theme has an improved and more granular set of break-points for responsive design websites.
I don't think that I should spend time changing the rest of my theme just to make it different enough from the original code. I would be spending energy on an unworthy cause. I don't think that there is anything wrong with having a theme that is similar to another one. That's the point of open source. We are supposed to stand on the shoulders of giants.
I believe that the changes that I made on the Bartik theme are worthy of sharing with the rest of the community. My only hope is that the community will allow me to prove that this theme has the potential to be useful to others.
There is only one way to know for sure whether my theme will be well received or not. You can only answer this question by allowing me to make this theme into a full project.
I am hoping that you will.
:)
Once again, I thank you for the time spent on reviewing my project.
Comment #20
e2tha-e commenteddrupalfever ,
This theme still gets a bunch of errors when run through pareview.sh.
They are all this error:
It's just a coding standard which the Drupal community deems significant enough to call an error when not adhered to. But in any case, your team looks comfortable with the short array syntax, even within the same file using the long syntax.
color/color.inc lines 122-129:
Might as well just use the short syntax consistently.
Comment #21
avpadernoI take the last comment forget to change status, since it is reporting code to change.
Comment #22
e2tha-e commented@kiamlaluno You are correct. Thanks!
Comment #23
avpadernoIf you are still working on this application, you should fix all known problems and set the status to Needs review. (See also the project application workflow.)
Please don't change status of this application if you aren't sure you have time to dedicate to this application, or it will be closed again as won't fix.
I am closing this application due to lack of activity.