What JISCPM does
JISCPM is a module that allows users to create "live" documentation for project management based on the JISC Project Management framework. This framework is particularly useful for educational projects.
When working on documents using this framework, data needed to continually be updated manually throughout concurrent locations (i.e. project phases, team members, risks etc.). This makes documentation even more tedious than it already is and elevates the possibility for error.
This module allows the creation of documentation with only the necessary fields and allows users to view linked data - i.e. users assigned to projects, risks, issues etc. This encourages a more agile style of working with documentation.
There is also an export function that allows basic data to be exported into documents that can be provided to external stakeholders.
At the moment the project is a board framework with only the necessary document templates for basic project documentation. In the future software specifications and design documents will be added to the module.
Where is it?
Project page: http://drupal.org/sandbox/scarer/1422278
Git repository: scarer@git.drupal.org:sandbox/scarer/1422278.git or git@github.com:scarer/JISC-PM-Drupal-Module.git
Drupal version
Currently this module has been developed for Drupal 6.
| Comment | File | Size | Author |
|---|---|---|---|
| #21 | drupalcs-result.txt | 3.33 KB | klausi |
| #2 | jiscpm.txt | 2.48 KB | wesleydv |
Comments
Comment #1
klausiThe response time for a review is now approaching 4 weeks. Get a review bonus and we will come back to your application sooner.
Comment #2
wesleydv commentedIt appears you are working in the "master" branch in git. You should really be working in a version specific branch. The most direct documentation on this is Moving from a master branch to a version branch. For additional resources please see the documentation about release naming conventions and creating a branch in git.
Review of the master branch:
This automated report was generated with PAReview.sh, your friendly project application review script. You can also use the online version to check your project. Get a review bonus and we will come back to your application sooner.
Comment #3
wesleydv commentedComment #4
scarer commentedI've just re-named the README to README.txt. There seems to be a few errors that the Coder module didn't pick up (according to Ventral). Is Ventral a better source to follow for fixing errors? Should I check it through that some more?
I tried to update the name of my repo using the GIT rename command and it seems to have done it locally but not remotely. What's the best way to do this? Should I re-create the repo branch? Or re-create the repo? My local repo is now showing as 6.x-1.0. Initially, I changed it to 6.x-1.dev but this wasn't up to scratch. I also updated the master branch as suggested to re-direct to the branch releases. I've also added another branch called 6.x.1.x. Which is more appropriate 6.x-1.0 or 6.x.1.x? Also, how can you remove remote branches?
Thanks for your help. Sorry for all the questions. I'll see what I can review in the queue to push this along.
Comment #5
scarer commentedI'm pretty sure that I've successfully deleted the unnecessary branches. I had a look in the queue at modules to review and there's only one at the moment that seems quite saturated with contributors. I'll download it and take a look at it.
I'll see if I can get rid of some of the errors produced by Ventral. They're mostly just spacing based issues now which weren't coming up in Coder. I actually modified the spacing so Coder wouldn't complain so I'll go back and change the spacing for Ventral.
Comment #6
scarer commentedComment #7
scarer commentedI have removed as many errors as I can using Ventral. If anyone has any suggestions on how to fix the remaining errors they would be appreciated. Some of them don't make a lot of sense (i.e. the spacing error - I could do what it says but then the spacing would not be appropriate). It could be a problem with Ventral.
Comment #8
scarer commentedOk new errors now in Ventral. Not many though now which is good. Will take a look at these. Also getting some errors on the module now when I've re-installed it after fixing stuff so will look at them now.
Comment #9
scarer commentedshould be ok now. still can't get rid of all ventral errors. if anyone has any suggestions on how to get rid of them please let me know.
Comment #10
scarer commentedComment #11
scarer commentedno errors in ventral.
Comment #12
scarer commentedReview bonus for Store Front here: http://drupal.org/node/1402752#comment-5703282
Comment #13
scarer commentedReview bonus for Controller here http://drupal.org/node/1389042#comment-5703324
Comment #14
scarer commentedReview bonus for RBK Money module: http://drupal.org/node/1136122#comment-5703366
Comment #15
scarer commentedReview bonus for cSupport live chat: http://drupal.org/node/1405978#comment-5703494
Comment #16
patrickd commented@scarer
I'm sorry but just quoting issues found by automated tools does not make your review "manual".
A manual review, as required for review bonus, means that your actually analysing the code for logic, security or API missusages the automated review could not find.
Also it's really not necessary to post each of your reviews into a single comment, just edit your issue summary and add it there.
Comment #17
prashantgoel commentedplease visit http://ventral.org/pareview/httpgitdrupalorgsandboxscarer1422278git for the list of errors being generated
Comment #18
patrickd commenteddon't block in-depht reviews because of these minor issues found by automated tools
Comment #19
scarer commentedReviews from the Bonus Review list:
http://drupal.org/node/1483532#comment-5967708
http://drupal.org/node/1555444#comment-5967656
http://drupal.org/node/1536182#comment-5953874
http://drupal.org/node/1556812#comment-5968118
Comment #20
scarer commentedAdded PAReview: review bonus tag
Comment #21
klausiThank you for your reviews. When finishing your review comment also set the issue status either to "needs work" (you found some problems with the project) or "reviewed & tested by the community" (you found no flaws).
Your forgot to add your reviews to the issue summary as outlined in #1410826: [META] Review bonus.
Review of the 6.x-1.x branch:
This automated report was generated with PAReview.sh, your friendly project application review script. You can also use the online version to check your project. Get a review bonus and we will come back to your application sooner.
manual review:
Removing review bonus tag, you can add it again if you have done another 3 reviews of other projects.
Comment #22
scarer commentedThanks for your feedback klausi. I think I've fixed all the problems you mention except item 10.
I looked at the documentation in the API for these and couldn't find a lot. I found this article on stack overflow that outlines how to go about implementing this: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/2383865/how-do-i-use-theme-preprocess...
Is that the appropriate way?
I'll do some more reviews of some other projects in the meantime.
Cheers.
Comment #23
scarer commentedThis is the links stuff I've seen that it's based on: http://api.drupal.org/api/drupal/includes!theme.inc/function/theme_links/6 and http://drupal.org/node/352924#comment-1189890. Should I be using the module_preprocess_hook instead? Sorry there's not a lot of documentation around that I can find about it.
Also, with the ventral verification it looks like something has been introduced recently with short function doc comments. I'm not sure what the definition of a "short" comment is as all of these functions have doc comments in compliance with: http://drupal.org/node/1354#functions.
Thanks for your help so far.
Cheers.
Comment #24
scarer commentedI've just removed the theme_jiscpm_link() altogether. Still getting those short function doc comment errors. Not sure how to fix them. I tried adding extra lines to the comment. It didn't do anything. Any advice here?
Cheers.
Comment #25
shawn_smiley commentedInteresting project scarer, thanks for building it and submitting it back to the community.
First off, in response to your last question, it appears the short function doc comment issues reported by drupalcs have been resolved.
There are still quite a few issues with this module. Here is a list of some of the issues and some general recommendations.
Here are a few examples:
TIP: When testing locally, make sure your PHP error reporting level is set to "E_ALL | E_STRICT | E_DEPRECATED" That way Drupal will output these warnings as messages in the watchdog while you're testing. Make sure you're periodically checking the watchdog and Apache logs for errors/warnings from your module files.
Do something like this:
I stopped reviewing at this point.
Here are some general pointers to use when looking at your module:
Comment #26
scarer commentedThanks very much for all your feedback Shawn. I've just changed jobs so I will be looking at this as soon as I can.
Kind regards,
Sarah
Comment #27
klausiClosing due to lack of activity. Feel free to reopen if you are still working on this application.