Attached patch fixes coding standard issues.
Problem/Motivation
(EDIT)
The patch is quite old and currently is outdated.
The full list of coding standard issues could be found by looking at the output of the automated tests at https://www.drupal.org/node/3287/qa
Proposed resolution
Patches should NOT try to fix all issues at one time - instead, they should focus on just one type of coding standards problem and fix that one type of problem for Redirect. Note that there are some issues that should probably NOT be fixed. Let's focus on getting the important things done first, like missing @param and documentation comments and solve them as child issues.
Remaining tasks
User interface changes
API changes
Data model changes
Release notes snippet
Comment | File | Size | Author |
---|---|---|---|
#12 | phpcs-redirect-august-8-2023-issue-2850121.txt | 49.75 KB | Kristen Pol |
#7 | 2850121-coding_standards-7.patch | 8.92 KB | andralex |
|
Comments
Comment #2
andralex CreditAttribution: andralex at EPAM Systems for EPAM Systems commentedComment #3
andralex CreditAttribution: andralex at EPAM Systems for EPAM Systems commentedComment #4
solideogloria CreditAttribution: solideogloria commented1. redirects.view -- should this file be a .php file or something? I don't know what a .view file is.
2. redirect.admin.inc calls
redirect_build_filter_query($query, array('w.message'), $keys);
. I get the following error from Intelliphense:So maybe
redirect_build_filter_query
should have a different parameter type hint?3. redirect.install
Should this be caused by the DB index limitations of some databases?
Comment #5
andralex CreditAttribution: andralex at EPAM Systems for EPAM Systems commentedHere is a patch that fixes issues from #4
Comment #6
andralex CreditAttribution: andralex at EPAM Systems for EPAM Systems commentedHere is an updated patch with correct encoding and line endings.
Comment #7
andralex CreditAttribution: andralex at EPAM Systems for EPAM Systems commentedRemoved changes from .install file as it is part of 7.x-1.x branch.
Comment #8
solideogloria CreditAttribution: solideogloria commented@andralex Just FYI, 1.x and 2.x branches are the same. There
iswas literally no difference between the two (until recently, when a couple commits were only applied to 1.x), and that 1.x is actually used. We should target 1.x until there's actually a reason to change to 2.x.Comment #9
andralex CreditAttribution: andralex at EPAM Systems for EPAM Systems commentedHello @solideogloria,
I've changed the target version to 7.1.
Comment #10
solideogloria CreditAttribution: solideogloria commentedComment #11
Kristen PolAssigning to myself as I'm triaging all RTBC issues.
Comment #12
Kristen PolThanks for the issue, patches, and reviews.
Unfortunately, this is definitely very outdated. See attached output from:
Also note 2 related issues:
#3136894: Missing doc comment
#3136904: Line exceeds 80 characters
Comment #13
Kristen PolPostponing this one for now until some others get handled first:
#3136894: Missing doc comment
#3136904: Line exceeds 80 characters
#3136895: Missing parameter type