[D7] Views Hide Exposed Form

you have some minor issues that you should correct:

Review of the 7.x-1.x branch:

Coder Sniffer has found some issues with your code (please check the Drupal coding standards).
FILE: ...ew/pareview_temp/views_hide_exposed_form_plugin_exposed_form_hidden.inc
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FOUND 5 ERROR(S) AFFECTING 2 LINE(S)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
12 | ERROR | Class name must begin with a capital letter
12 | ERROR | Class name must use UpperCamel naming without underscores
13 | ERROR | Missing function doc comment
13 | ERROR | Method name
| | "views_hide_exposed_form_plugin_exposed_form_hidden::render_exposed_form"
| | is not in lowerCamel format, it must not contain underscores
13 | ERROR | No scope modifier specified for function "render_exposed_form"
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hi,
Believe me I was working on a View with an attachment+exposed filters that I really needed this module!

One thing is that the project description is too short. Module worked great for me.

correct me if I am wrong, but this module does not meet the minimum requirements to be reviewed. Basically, the code without including views inc is too short. 15 lines for the .module, with just one function.

Point 2.3 in Project application checklist: https://drupal.org/node/1587704

2.3 Ensure your project contains a minimum of handwritten code.
We are currently discussing how much code we need, but everything with less than 120 lines of code or less than 5 functions cannot be seriously reviewed, that means we can't make sure you're able to write secure code and use Drupal's APIs correctly.
If this is the case, we can't approve you as git vetted user (giving you the permission to create full projects). Either we can see that you have the needed knowledge by other contributions within the drupal community or we can promote it to a full project manually.

Thank you.

README.txt

Please take a moment to make your README.txt follow the guidelines for in-project documentation.

Duplication

This sounds like a feature that should live in the existing Views exposed autohide project. Module duplication and fragmentation is a huge problem on drupal.org and we prefer collaboration over competition. Please open an issue in the Views exposed autohide issue queue to discuss what you need. You should also get in contact with the maintainer(s) to offer your help to move the project forward. If you cannot reach the maintainer(s) please follow the abandoned project process.

If that fails for whatever reason please get back to us and set this back to "needs review".

Ichang, functional your module not enough to create a new module. It is enough to create a patch to the module Views exposed autohide.

Code too short

This project is too short to approve you as git vetted user. We are currently discussing how much code we need, but everything with less than 120 lines of code or less than 5 functions cannot be seriously reviewed. However, we can promote this single project manually to a full project for you.

I also agreed with the point , we dont need to install a new module for this. It is very small changes , and you can do it in hook functions of views or just hiding through css. To have such a small module enabled in site making site slow. So it would say you could extend it in more so it can have some more features with views.

Multiple Applications

It appears that there have been multiple project applications opened under your username:

Project 1: https://drupal.org/node/2089425

Project 2: https://drupal.org/node/2081543

As successful completion of the project application process results in the applicant being granted the 'Create Full Projects' permission, there is no need to take multiple applications through the process. Once the first application has been successfully approved, then the applicant can promote other projects without review. Because of this, posting multiple applications is not necessary, and results in additional workload for reviewers ... which in turn results in longer wait times for everyone in the queue. With this in mind, your secondary applications have been marked as 'closed(duplicate)', with only one application left open (chosen at random).

If you prefer that we proceed through this review process with a different application than the one which was left open, then feel free to close the 'open' application as a duplicate, and re-open one of the project applications which had been closed.

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

Hi Ichang,

I had a look at your project.
The code looks straight forward to me and it's working as supposed, so basically there is nothing to criticize, well done!

Still I found some probably not too important things to mention here:
A comment in the disable-hook of your .install-file would be helpful and could save possible co-workers some time figuring that out.
Typo in views_hide_exposed_form_plugin_exposed_form_hidden.inc: "Exposed form plugin that hides a exposed form." It should be "an exposed form" here.
Typo in views_hide_exposed_form.module: "Hides the Views exposed form." It should be "View's" here.

Nothing critical at all, so there is no need to change the status to "needs work". Anyway I have to agree with @bohart and @takim, the module's code is really minimalistic, though its functionality is quite useful. Maybe you should consider working together with Views, Better exposed filters or any module that already deals with the behaviour of exposed filters, to save the time of Drupal-users they need to find out that there is a additional module available and required for their usecase.

Basically this project's code would be ready to receive the RTBC-status, but this sure is something to think about before changing the status.

regards,
Martin

Hi lchang,
While I'm excited to see you have contributed something I exactly wanted, I'd like you to pay attention to what others have said about "enough code" and project merging. Promoting a module from sandbox to a real project and getting the vetted status are two different stuff. I believe maintainers of Better Exposed filters or other similar modules would gladly commit patches if you submit them and give you the full credit.
IMHO, setting the status to "needs review" will only make things slower.

This module seems most appropriate as a patch to the existing Views module (now in core). It's adding exactly one option to the concept of an exposed filter. I would encourage you to open an issue there to get some feedback on the idea. If the Views maintainers really don't want it, then a separate module is the way to go.

Possible Duplication

If the differences between Views and this module are not too fundamental for patching the existing one, we would love to see you joining forces and concentrate all power on enhancing one module.

If that fails for whatever reason please get back to us and set this back to "needs review".

I don't think this is a useful feature though. Edit: I just read Ayesh's commment again, and his idea to provide this as a patch to Better Exposed Filters is a good one too!

----
Top Shelf Modules - Crafted, Curated, Contributed.

Well, that's too bad, I did think it was a very useful feature. Anyone else want to write a patch for Better Exposed Filter?

Updated description