This is now merged, I have re-formated master. I used a PR so the PR check would validate my changes. https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/115
Everybody committing to this branch please update your IDE settings. I have updated IDEA-style.jar under ./etc for the ones using idea. Eclipse should reuse the checkstyle file but you should still update your IDE accordingly I believe. Everyone should do a "mvn -Pdev install" before committing on the branch, mainly now that the style just changed till you all get used (this applies to me and anyone used to the former style). On Tue, Aug 4, 2015 at 3:29 PM, Andy Taylor <[email protected]> wrote: > Works for me > > On Tue, 4 Aug 2015 20:22 Clebert Suconic <[email protected]> wrote: > >> What about this: >> >> I do this change next Sunday night / Monday morning. That would give >> you or anyone else time to finish current works. If anyone has >> anything big pending please send me a note by Friday through this >> thread. >> >> >> I will close that PR for now. >> >> On Tue, Aug 4, 2015 at 3:03 PM, Andy Taylor <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> > +0, I dont really mind what style is used and happy for it to be >> changed. It >> > may make sense tho not to make the changes while anyone is making big >> > changes, I'm doing some refactoring now and don't fancy a list of >> conflicts >> > when i rebase. maybe just before or just after a release would be a good >> > point? >> > >> > Andy >> > >> > >> > On 04/08/15 19:17, Christopher Shannon wrote: >> >> >> >> I checked out the branch and the curly brace changes look good to me, +1 >> >> >> >> On Tue, Aug 4, 2015 at 1:20 PM, Clebert Suconic >> >> <[email protected]> >> >> wrote: >> >> >> >>> This is where a pull request fits nicely... >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> I sent a Pull request with my proposed changes: >> >>> >> >>> https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/107 >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> it consists of three commits: >> >>> >> >>> - The checkstyle update: >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> https://github.com/clebertsuconic/activemq-artemis/commit/f7ef6b08492bb74062d322e73b88d37767fed922 >> >>> >> >>> - the changes itself >> >>> - the idea settings update (so people can import it to idea). >> >>> >> >>> * I coudln't make exclipe work myself, but I know eclipse will import >> >>> the checkstyle.xml to the ide settings. >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> The best way to evaluate the changes would be through a checkout of >> >>> the branch though... the changeet is too big to look at the web >> >>> browser but you could get a good idea already of the changes I made. >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> On Tue, Aug 4, 2015 at 1:03 PM, Robbie Gemmell < >> [email protected]> >> >>> wrote: >> >>>> >> >>>> On 4 August 2015 at 12:56, Christopher Shannon >> >>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>>>> >> >>>>> So in general I'm not too picky with coding styles but I just started >> >>>>> looking at the Artemis project a few days ago and something that >> stood >> >>> >> >>> out >> >>>>> >> >>>>> to me right away was the use of opening curly braces on a new line. >> >>>>> >> >>>>> Virtually ever Java code base I've seen is written in the style using >> >>> >> >>> the >> >>>>> >> >>>>> opening brace on the same line. (See >> >>>>> >> >>> >> >>> >> http://google.github.io/styleguide/javaguide.html#s4.1.2-blocks-k-r-style) >> >>>>> >> >>>>> I think that in general it would be a good idea to match up to a >> >>>>> style >> >>>>> that most Java developers are used to working with if we want to get >> >>> >> >>> more >> >>>>> >> >>>>> of the community involved. >> >>>>> >> >>>>> I was wondering if anyone would have an issue with changing the style >> >>>>> or >> >>>>> what people's thoughts are about this potential change? >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> Making all of the code more consistent seems like a good idea to aid >> >>>> approachability, so it seems like a good idea to me. I do work on >> >>>> codebases that use a newline for the braces, but most new stuff I >> >>>> write has them on the same line. I've tended to prefer them being on >> >>>> the new line in the past as I think its slightly easier to read >> >>>> overall, but its defintiely quite verbose at times. I am coming to >> >>>> like the same line approach the more I use it though, and it does seem >> >>>> to be the norm. >> >>>> >> >>>> Robbie >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> -- >> >>> Clebert Suconic >> >>> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> -- >> Clebert Suconic >> -- Clebert Suconic
