What about having a reporting profile (enabled per default). And using -DskipReports to not generated cobertura, findbugs etc..
Perso I like this idea as currently when you want to test a typo fix in a .apt or .xdoc it's very long to generate the site only for a typo fix in documentation. 2013/1/9 Gilles Sadowski <gil...@harfang.homelinux.org>: > On Wed, Jan 09, 2013 at 08:37:33AM -0500, Gary Gregory wrote: >> On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 8:11 AM, Gilles Sadowski < >> gil...@harfang.homelinux.org> wrote: >> >> > On Wed, Jan 09, 2013 at 07:25:45AM -0500, Gary Gregory wrote: >> > > IMO code coverage should be part of the standard documentation for a >> > > component. Looking at code coverage helps establish or shake my >> > > confidence in a component. It should definitively be part of ones >> > > development checklist, I like to have the best code coverage for any >> > > new code that I check in. >> > > >> > > Gary >> > > >> > > On Jan 9, 2013, at 5:16, Olivier Lamy <ol...@apache.org> wrote: >> > > >> > > > Hi Folks, >> > > > I have started importing some content for sub projects (exec, >> > > > collections). I will try to do more later. >> > > > >> > > > Where is the place to document that ? >> > > > >> > > > Note: currently some content is imported which could be removed (I >> > > > think about cobertura for modules which use sonar). >> > > > >> > > > What is the status about moving cobertura to a dedicated profile in >> > > > parent pom ? >> > > > Can I move it to a reporting profile in parent pom ? >> > > > >> > >> > For [Math] it would be much better (since AFAIK nobody came up with a way >> > to >> > disable Cobertura on a per-component basis). >> > >> > From what I infer from looking at the Sonar report page, we could have the >> > best of all worlds if every Commons project were registered indepently in >> > Sonar. Currently, there is one "Commons Proper Aggregator Project >> > 1.0-SNAPSHOT" (which does not represent the actual situation that the >> > components are independent from each other). However, it seems that with >> > several projects registered, it could be possible to compare two versions >> > of the same project, thereby providing complete information on the >> > evolution >> > of the code. Am I wrong? >> > >> >> Sonar has no value for local development though (before you commit). I need >> the reports to run locally when, for example, I am improving code coverage, >> fixing FindBugs, PMD, and Checkstyle issues. > > Nothing will prevent you to run Cobertura by calling the new profile > explicitly. We've explained that Cobertura is a PITA for Commons Math > developers. > > > Thanks, > Gilles > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org > -- Olivier Lamy Talend: http://coders.talend.com http://twitter.com/olamy | http://linkedin.com/in/olamy --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
