[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-10325?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13892458#comment-13892458
]
Andrew Wang commented on HADOOP-10325:
--------------------------------------
Sorry about the RAT warnings, I just fixed the missing license header in the
test file.
One q about the diff though, can we do a bit better than diffing the full maven
outputs? Maybe I missed where it filters, but a full diff doesn't seem that
helpful. I was thinking that a {{grep -A $(( 3 * numWarnings )) }} for each "#
warnings" line thing would be accurate enough, or we just do like the old
script and chop+grep and diff that.
> improve jenkins javadoc warnings from test-patch.sh
> ---------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: HADOOP-10325
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-10325
> Project: Hadoop Common
> Issue Type: Bug
> Affects Versions: 3.0.0
> Reporter: Colin Patrick McCabe
> Assignee: Colin Patrick McCabe
> Attachments: HADOOP-10325.001.patch, HADOOP-10325.002.patch,
> HADOOP-10325.003.patch
>
>
> Currently test-patch.sh uses {{OK_JAVADOC_WARNINGS}} to know how many
> warnings trunk is expected to have. However, this is a fragile and difficult
> to use system, since different build slaves may generate different numbers of
> warnings (based on compiler revision, etc.). Also, programmers must remember
> to update {{OK_JAVADOC_WARNINGS}}, which they don't always. Finally, there
> is no easy way to find what the *new* javadoc warnings are in the huge pile
> of warnings.
> We should change this to work the same way the javac warnings code does: to
> simply build with and without the patch and do a diff. The diff should be
> saved for easy perusal. We also should not complain about warnings being
> removed.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.1.5#6160)
