I suppose it can be easy for the existing feature branches if they have a single commit. Don't we need to adjust each commit for multi-commit feature branches?
śr., 22 lut 2023, 19:48 użytkownik Maxim Muzafarov <mmu...@apache.org> napisał: > Hello everyone, > > I have created an issue CASSANDRA-18277 that may help us move forward > with code style changes. It only affects the way we store the IntelliJ > code style configuration and has no effect on any current (or any) > releases, so it should be safe to merge. So, once the issue is > resolved, every developer that checkouts a release branch will use the > same code style stored in that branch. This in turn makes rebasing a > big change like the import order [1] a really straightforward matter > (by pressing Crtl + Opt + O in their local branch to organize > imports). > > See: > > Move the IntelliJ Idea code style and inspections configuration to the > project's root .idea directory > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-18277 > > > > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-17925 > > On Wed, 25 Jan 2023 at 13:05, Miklosovic, Stefan > <stefan.mikloso...@netapp.com> wrote: > > > > Thank you Maxim for doing this. > > > > It is nice to see this effort materialized in a PR. > > > > I would wait until bigger chunks of work are committed to trunk (like > CEP-15) to not collide too much. I would say we can postpone doing this > until the actual 5.0 release, last weeks before it so we would not clash > with any work people would like to include in 5.0. This can go in anytime, > basically. > > > > Are people on the same page? > > > > Regards > > > > ________________________________________ > > From: Maxim Muzafarov <mmu...@apache.org> > > Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 19:46 > > To: dev@cassandra.apache.org > > Subject: Re: [DISCUSSION] Cassandra's code style and source code analysis > > > > NetApp Security WARNING: This is an external email. Do not click links > or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is > safe. > > > > > > > > > > Hello everyone, > > > > You can find the changes here: > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-17925 > > > > While preparing the code style configuration for the Eclipse IDE, I > > discovered that there was no easy way to have complex grouping options > > for the set of packages. So we need to add extra blank lines between > > each group of packages so that all the configurations for Eclipse, > > NetBeans, IntelliJ IDEA and checkstyle are aligned. I should have > > checked this earlier for sure, but I only did it for static imports > > and some groups, my bad. The resultant configuration looks like this: > > > > java.* > > [blank line] > > javax.* > > [blank line] > > com.* > > [blank line] > > net.* > > [blank line] > > org.* > > [blank line] > > org.apache.cassandra.* > > [blank line] > > all other imports > > [blank line] > > static all other imports > > > > The pull request is here: > > https://github.com/apache/cassandra/pull/2108 > > > > The configuration-related changes are placed in a dedicated commit, so > > it should be easy to make a review: > > > https://github.com/apache/cassandra/pull/2108/commits/84e292ddc9671a0be76ceb9304b2b9a051c2d52a > > > > ________________________________ > > > > Another important thing to mention is that the total amount of changes > > for organising imports is really big (more than 2000 files!), so we > > need to decide the right time to merge this PR. Although rebasing or > > merging changes to development branches should become much easier > > ("Accept local" + "Organize imports"), we still need to pay extra > > attention here to minimise the impact on major patches for the next > > release. > > > > On Mon, 16 Jan 2023 at 13:16, Maxim Muzafarov <mmu...@apache.org> wrote: > > > > > > Stefan, > > > > > > Thank you for bringing this topic up. I'll prepare the PR shortly with > > > option 4, so everyone can take a look at the amount of changes. This > > > does not force us to go exactly this path, but it may shed light on > > > changes in general. > > > > > > What exactly we're planning to do in the PR: > > > > > > 1. Checkstyle AvoidStarImport rule, so no star imports will be allowed. > > > 2. Checkstyle ImportOrder rule, for controlling the order. > > > 3. The IDE code style configuration for Intellij IDEA, NetBeans, and > > > Eclipse (it doesn't exist for Eclipse yet). > > > 4. The import order according to option 4: > > > > > > ``` > > > java.* > > > javax.* > > > [blank line] > > > com.* > > > net.* > > > org.* > > > [blank line] > > > org.apache.cassandra.* > > > [blank line] > > > all other imports > > > [blank line] > > > static all other imports > > > ``` > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, 16 Jan 2023 at 12:39, Miklosovic, Stefan > > > <stefan.mikloso...@netapp.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > Based on the voting we should go with option 4? > > > > > > > > Two weeks passed without anybody joining so I guess folks are all > happy with that or this just went unnoticed? > > > > > > > > Let's give it time until the end of this week (Friday 12:00 UTC). > > > > > > > > Regards > > > > > > > > ________________________________________ > > > > From: Maxim Muzafarov <mmu...@apache.org> > > > > Sent: Tuesday, January 3, 2023 14:31 > > > > To: dev@cassandra.apache.org > > > > Subject: Re: [DISCUSSION] Cassandra's code style and source code > analysis > > > > > > > > NetApp Security WARNING: This is an external email. Do not click > links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the > content is safe. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Folks, > > > > > > > > Let me update the voting status and put together everything we have > so > > > > far. We definitely need more votes to have a solid foundation for > this > > > > change, so I encourage everyone to consider the options above and > > > > share them in this thread. > > > > > > > > > > > > Total for each applicable option: > > > > > > > > 4-th option -- 4 votes > > > > 3-rd option -- 3 votes > > > > 5-th option -- 1 vote > > > > 1-st option -- 0 votes > > > > 2-nd option -- 0 votes > > > > > > > > On Thu, 22 Dec 2022 at 22:06, Mick Semb Wever <m...@apache.org> > wrote: > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> 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 > > > > >> ``` > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 3, then 5. > > > > > There's lots under com.*, net.*, org.* that is essentially the > same as "all other imports", what's the reason to separate those? > > > > > > > > > > My preference for 3 is simply that imports are by default > collapsed, and if I expand them it's the dependencies on other cassandra > stuff I'm first grokking. It's also our only imports that lead to cyclic > dependencies (which we're not good at). >
