Plugin code rejected

wordpress

#1

It’s the second time my plugin is rejected on Codecanyon without any clearly mentioned issue.
They say “Plugin doesn’t mean code quality standard. Hard Reject.”
Can someone please elaborate this “Code Quality Standards”.

Firstly I tried to plublish this plugin on Codecanyon, but they reject it.
So I published this on our site : https://wbcomdesigns.com/downloads/peepso-wpforo-addon/
This plugin appreciated both by PeepSo https://www.peepso.com/ and wpForo https://wpforo.com/

Again I tried to come with LifterLMS PeepSo Integration and my plugin is rejected.
Sandbox is setup here : https://demos.wbcomdesigns.in/peepso-lifterlms/

Looking for some serious input form active forum members.
Please look into this.

Thanks
Wbcom Designs


#2

Hello @wbcomdesigns

(what I am telling now it’s from a simple codecanyon author perspective, it’s not something official; but it can help you with feature item uploads)

To check your code quality, I’d suggest checking your code with PHP_Code_Sniffer, using these rulesets customized for WordPress:



These rulesets are customized according to the PHP Coding Standards recommended by WordPress as best practice.

You can find at the bottom of this wiki page how to set up PHP_Code_Sniffer with these custom rulesets in your IDE (Atom, Eclipse, Sublime Text, PHP Storm, Visual Studio):

I can tell you… once you set this up is a huge improvement and help for your future development process. :wink:

All the best!


#3

@hevada Thanks for your input.
I am already following PHPCS while developing plugin to deliver quality results to my client.
Despite of following all ideal methods of developing plugins, my plugins are keep on rejecting on codecanyon. I am not saying, there is no possibility of mistake from our side. I am willing to accept the reason and mitigate the issue. But what I want is a clear mention about the issues.
I am really disappointed. My plugins are doing good when I am delivering them to my clients from my site. But they are keep on facing rejection here.

Anyways, Thanks @hevada for your input. I appreciate.