Will it be fear to say that if 1 is selected, the task needs to be
picked up by one of voters :-)
Thank you,
Vlad
On 10/20/15 11:24, Munagala Ramanath wrote:
I prefer the simplicity of 1 -- pay the price once and the issue is solved
forever (I know, I'm an optimist).
Ram
On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 11:15 AM, Vlad Rozov <[email protected]>
wrote:
All,
We have a large number of existing checkstyle violations and it is
cumbersome to distinguish a newly introduced violation from existing ones.
We need to agree on the process to fix them and there are multiple
approaches how we can do it.
1. Fix them all in a single commit (one commit for Core and one for
Malhar). Pros: change can easily be distinguished from logical code
changes. Cons: large number of changes in a single commit, hard to review.
Changes and review likely to be done by developers not familiar with code
specifics.
2. Fix as we go. Only change code style violation in modified places.
Pros: limited amount of change. Easy to review. Cons: likely to take
forever. Some part of the code may not be fixed at all.
3. Somewhat combination of 1 & 2. Fix all violations in files affected by
a commit. Pros: changes likely to be done by developers familiar with the
code. Cons: harder to distinguish between logical and style changes in a
single commit.
4. Any other suggestions?
Independently of the approach selected, we should not allow commits where
entire file is modified due to style modifications. Such file(s) needs to
be fixed and committed using Malhar CI.
Thank you,
Vlad
