"Dennis Lundberg" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Dion Gillard wrote: >> Guys, >> >> this sounds like bike shed paint discussion. > > Well, in that case I want mine blue ;) >
Paint mine green ;-). >> We're under resourced here as it is. >> >> Do we really have extra volunteers waiting to frack about making reports >> consistent? >> Does it really make it easier for our users? I haven't seen complaints >> about >> inconsistent maven reports lately. >> AFAICT, maintaining the project.xml files hasn't been a big hassle. > > First off, I wouldn't be starting this discussion if I wasn't prepared to > work on it. > > This is one of many steps that I feel are needed to get a faster, more > reliable and more automated system for handling our component sites. That > would in turn free the developers, who might not be interested in the site > stuff, to do more coding or whatever they feel like contributing with. If you want to volunteer to maintain the pom for [modeler] and [daemon], I've got no complaints (knock yourself out :). If you want to volunteer *my* time to maintain them, then I'm totally -1 (I consider myself being nice by not WONTFIXing the bug that [modeler] won't even build under Maven, even if the result is the same :). > > -- > Dennis Lundberg > >> On 5/20/06, Dennis Lundberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> >>> Hello >>> >>> I would like to start a discussion about trying to unify which Maven >>> reports should be used for each commons component. The reasons I find >>> for unifying the reports are these: >>> - Makes it easy for our users if we are consistent - they know what to >>> expect >>> - Makes it easier for us to maintain our project.xml files >>> - Facilitate Maven 2 migration >>> >>> Digging into the Maven 1 POMs for commons proper I have come up with the >>> list of reports here below. Some reports that are only used in a few >>> components have been omitted. I have also tried to categorize and >>> describe each report, borrowing/stealing a lot from chapter 6 in the new >>> book "Better Builds with Maven". >>> >>> + means that I think that all components should use this report >>> o means that I think this report should be optional >>> - means that I don't think any component should use this report >>> >>> >>> Standard >>> + license >>> >>> Source health >>> + checkstyle (code formatting) >>> + jdepend (quality metrics) >>> + pmd/cpd (bugs, code duplication, coding standards) >>> + tasklist (to do list) >>> - findbugs (same as pmd?) >>> - simian (same as cpd) >>> >>> Tests >>> + cobertura (test coverage) >>> + junit (test reports) >>> - clover (same as cobertura) >>> - jcoverage (same as cobertura) >>> >>> Changes since last release >>> + changelog (SCM activity per commit) >>> + clirr (binary compatibility) >>> + developer-activity (SCM activity per developer) >>> + file-activity (SCM activity per file) >>> o changes >>> - jdiff (same as clirr) >>> >>> Reference >>> + javadoc >>> + jxr (cross reference) >>> >>> User guide >>> o faq >>> - linkcheck (might be enabled during development) >>> >>> >>> With that I will duck from the flames and see what the rest of you think >>> :) >>> >>> -- >>> Dennis Lundberg >>> >>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>> >>> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
