On Mar 13, 2012, at 14:05, sebb <seb...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 13 March 2012 17:59, Gary Gregory <garydgreg...@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Mar 13, 2012, at 12:40, Gilles Sadowski <gil...@harfang.homelinux.org> >> wrote: >> >>> Hi. >>> >>>>> >>>>>>> [...] >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The tools are there, but you have to tell people that they _must_ use >>>>>>> them. >>>>>> >>>>>> Commons has already enough rules and process. As long as the releases >>>>>> are have clean code I wouldn't be too anal about the commits in >>>>>> between. >>>>> >>>>> I think that the main disagreement is here. Source code must be a clear >>>>> read >>>>> for the _developers_. To put it bluntly, I don't care that the releases >>>>> have >>>>> cleanly formatted code, as almost nobody is going to read those packaged >>>>> sources! >> >> And another thing: the formatting /is/ important in released sources >> because, again, this is what most users will see in their debuggers. >> Have you seen some of the JRE sources? Some files are a mess, others >> have blank lines in the middle of headers. Others look like they were >> entered by a prisoner blinded in the noon day sun after spending a >> month in the hole with bread and water ration and then given a stick >> of butter for lunch. > > No, that was a 'tab' of butter (which then sometimes got stuck into the > source).
Darn, I should have checkstyled my message! Gary > >> Gary >> >>>> >>>> Nobody objects using Checkstyle. Personally I object a default >>>> Checkstyle config, which everybody must override. Nearly every >>>> components has specifics, so everybody MUST override. What if you >>>> don't want to use Checkstyle? Can you disable it? >>>> What, if you use Sun conventions and Maven conventions are the >>>> default? Much work! Please leave the checkstyle question to where it >>>> belongs, and this is not parent pom, but the individual component. >>>> >>>> And thats what I meant with: as long as we don't have a common >>>> codestyle, i does not make much sense to have a common checkstyle >>>> configuration. >>> >>> I thought that the question was whether to generate a CheckStyle report, not >>> whether the configuration should be the same... >>> >>>> Secondly, I have not had the feeling in the past years that checkstyle >>>> helped me so much (including non open source projects). And so far, my >>>> code was readable. >>> >>> My code is also readable... >>> >>> I forgot to mention earlier in this thread that a code formatter will not >>> detect missing comments; I've also seen that some people using IDE let the >>> software generate totally useless "place-holder" Javadoc comments. Hence >>> no tool can afterwards detect that documentation is missing. >>> >>> >>> Regards, >>> Gilles >>> >>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org >>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org >>> >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org >> > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
