I vote for #4. I've always used the convention of having stdlib stuff
first, external stuff second, and same-project imports last. I guess
increasing order of specificity?

Happy Holidays!

Derek

On Thu, Dec 22, 2022 at 7:52 AM Maxim Muzafarov <mmu...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> Hello everyone, have a great vacation and happy holidays to all!
>
>
> I've completed a small research about how the classe's import order
> rule are spread in the Apache projects. Some of the projects don't
> have any restrictions over the imports even if they are using the
> checkstyle configuration. The other ones may have only the consensus
> over the imports, but they are not reflected in the checkstyle yet
> (e.g. Kafka). The conclusion here can only be that there is a very
> large variability in the classe's import order, so we have to agree on
> the order on our own.
>
> You can find the projects, IDEs and frameworks and their corresponding
> classe's import order below:
> https://mmuzaf.github.io/blog/Java_Import_Orders.html
>
>
> Most of the time during development in an IDE the classe's imports
> remains collapsed, so from my point of view the following things
> related to the classe's import comes into the first place to consider:
>
> - a PR review: newly imports must be clearly visible;
> - try to minimize the total amount of affected files;
> - the import order rule must be implemented in a simple way and well
> supported by IDEs and its plugins;
>
> In addition to the last mentioned option, the checkstyle itself has
> some limitations also. For instance, the ImportOrder has a limitation
> by design to enforce an empty line between groups ("java", "javax"),
> or CustomImportOrder may have only up to 4 custom groups separated by
> a blank line.
>
>
>
> Based on all of the above I can propose the following classe's order.
> All of them are tested on the latest changes from the trunk branch
> (commit hash: b171b4ba294126e985d0ee629744516f19c8644e)
>
>
> 1. Total 2 groups, 3072 files to change
>
> ```
> all other imports
> [blank line]
> static all other imports
> ```
>
> 2. Total 3 groups, 2345 files to change
>
> ```
> java.*
> javax.*
> [blank line]
> all other imports
> [blank line]
> static all other imports
> ```
>
> 3. Total 5 groups, 2968 files to change
>
> ```
> org.apache.cassandra.*
> [blank line]
> java.*
> [blank line]
> javax.*
> [blank line]
> all other imports
> [blank line]
> static all other imports
> ```
>
> 4. Total 5 groups, 1792 files to change
>
> ```
> java.*
> javax.*
> [blank line]
> com.*
> net.*
> org.*
> [blank line]
> org.apache.cassandra.*
> [blank line]
> all other imports
> [blank line]
> static all other imports
> ```
>
> 5. Total 2 groups, 3114 files to change
>
> ```
> java.*
> javax.*
> org.apache.cassandra.*
> all other imports
> [blank line]
> static all other imports
> ```
>
>
> Of course, any suggestions are really appreciated.
> Please, share your thoughts.
>
> On Thu, 15 Dec 2022 at 17:48, Mick Semb Wever <m...@apache.org> wrote:
> >>
> >> Another angle I forgot to mention is that this is quite a big patch and 
> >> there are quite big pieces of work coming, being it CEP-15, for example. 
> >> So I am trying to figure out if we are ok to just merge this work first 
> >> and devs doing CEP-15 will need to rework their imports or we merge this 
> >> after them so we will fix their stuff. I do not know what is more 
> >> preferable.
> >
> >
> >
> > Thank you for bringing this point up Stefan.
> >
> > I would be actively reaching out to all those engaged with current CEPs, 
> > asking them the rebase impact this would cause and if they are ok with it. 
> > The CEPs are our priority, and we have a significant amount of them in 
> > progress compared to anything we've had for many years.
> >
> >
> >



-- 
+---------------------------------------------------------------+
| Derek Chen-Becker                                             |
| GPG Key available at https://keybase.io/dchenbecker and       |
| https://pgp.mit.edu/pks/lookup?search=derek%40chen-becker.org |
| Fngrprnt: EB8A 6480 F0A3 C8EB C1E7  7F42 AFC5 AFEE 96E4 6ACC  |
+---------------------------------------------------------------+

Reply via email to