maureen [maureen]

1. function style_override_init() {
     require_once 'style_override_properties.inc';
   

   hook_init() is not called for cached pages; depending on the case, this could create problems.
   The code should use module_load_include(), the instruction is looking at the file in the Drupal root directory (which is the current directory set when Drupal makes a full bootstrap), but the file is in the module directory.

2.         '#title' => t('font size'),
   

   The string used as title, or description should have the first word in capital case, and the others all in lowercase.

3.       if (strlen($property_value) > 0) {
           $save_item = (object) NULL;
           $save_item->property_id = $property_id;
           $save_item->selector_id = $selector_id;
   

   Drupal coding standards suggest which functions a module should use.

4. Files that are available from third-party sites should not be included in Drupal.org CVS repository, even if they are licensed under GPL License.
5. Extraneous files should be removed.

1, 2, 3 are not valid reasons. You would reject most of the d.o modules and even Drupal core, if you want to reject modules based on those rules

4 and 5 could be just mentioned, as there is no work with that, and the application approved

4 and 5 could be just mentioned, as there is no work with that, and the application approved

Isn't to remove files a work?

You would reject most of the d.o modules and even Drupal core.

Applicants need to show they have a minimum knowledge of the Drupal API; not using a function that Drupal makes available doesn't show the applicant knows the functions made available from Drupal.

Isn't to remove files a work?

no. she does not need to commit the files. So it is actually a less work.

Applicants need to show they have a minimum knowledge of the Drupal API

I think this module clearly shows that the applicant has a good knowledge of the Drupal API. You do not need to fix every minor issue when you are reviewing a CVS application. I can give you any number of examples from major modules where those 3 points are not followed, so it is not something you have to demand before accepting an application..

• What I reported about the functions to use is not a minor fix, IMO.
• The upload archive needs to reflect what the code committed in CVS will be; that is the reason I am saying that files available from third-party sites need to be removed.

I apologize if I, by any chances, I used the male pronoun referring to maureen.

@Pasqualle: Why don't you let the applicant talk? I don't think she needs a translator.

From reading the handbook pages about handling the CVS application, I think I have the right to review an application, and can talk if something is wrong with the process.. This application should have been approved without questions, it was ready at the first post..

if we could follow the off topic problem on this issue #579026: CVS application handling, that would be great

In a CVS application, the topic is the CVS application; if you want to write a comment, then you should write a review of the code.
If the applicant doesn't understand what reported, then the applicant should ask more information. There is no need for a third person to ask something that the applicant could ask. Also, if the applicant doesn't ask, I would get that s/he understood what I report; reporting that you don't understand what is reported is not needed (and it doesn't help the CVS application).

I think I many times said that the application is good, that means the code is good, that means I made a review. Please do not add any more comments about this here. There is always a need for third person in case of injustice..

Please do not add any more comments about this here.

You should do the same.

    case 'admin/settings/style_override':
      $output .= '<p>'. t('') .'</p>';
      $output .= '<p>'. t('') .'</p>';
      break;

The strings passed to t() are empty.