On Mar 13, 2012, at 12:40, Gilles Sadowski <gil...@harfang.homelinux.org> wrote:
> Hi. > >>> >>>>> [...] >>>>> >>>>> The tools are there, but you have to tell people that they _must_ use >>>>> them. >>>> >>>> Commons has already enough rules and process. As long as the releases >>>> are have clean code I wouldn't be too anal about the commits in >>>> between. >>> >>> I think that the main disagreement is here. Source code must be a clear read >>> for the _developers_. To put it bluntly, I don't care that the releases have >>> cleanly formatted code, as almost nobody is going to read those packaged >>> sources! And another thing: the formatting /is/ important in released sources because, again, this is what most users will see in their debuggers. Have you seen some of the JRE sources? Some files are a mess, others have blank lines in the middle of headers. Others look like they were entered by a prisoner blinded in the noon day sun after spending a month in the hole with bread and water ration and then given a stick of butter for lunch. Gary >> >> Nobody objects using Checkstyle. Personally I object a default >> Checkstyle config, which everybody must override. Nearly every >> components has specifics, so everybody MUST override. What if you >> don't want to use Checkstyle? Can you disable it? >> What, if you use Sun conventions and Maven conventions are the >> default? Much work! Please leave the checkstyle question to where it >> belongs, and this is not parent pom, but the individual component. >> >> And thats what I meant with: as long as we don't have a common >> codestyle, i does not make much sense to have a common checkstyle >> configuration. > > I thought that the question was whether to generate a CheckStyle report, not > whether the configuration should be the same... > >> Secondly, I have not had the feeling in the past years that checkstyle >> helped me so much (including non open source projects). And so far, my >> code was readable. > > My code is also readable... > > I forgot to mention earlier in this thread that a code formatter will not > detect missing comments; I've also seen that some people using IDE let the > software generate totally useless "place-holder" Javadoc comments. Hence > no tool can afterwards detect that documentation is missing. > > > Regards, > Gilles > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
