This looks pretty good indeed! Thanks Jared! On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 3:10 PM, Dan Smith <dsm...@pivotal.io> wrote:
> We've seen the sync to github lag before when there are lots of changes, > like when the docs were contributed. Hopefully the changes should show up > there shortly! > > -Dan > > On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 2:53 PM, Jared Stewart <jstew...@pivotal.io> > wrote: > > > By the way, when I pull develop from GitHub I don’t see these changes. > > Nor do I see them when I look here <https://github.com/apache/ > > incubator-geode/commits/develop>. It seems that they were added to the > > apache git repo but not the apache GitHub repo, maybe due to the GitHub > > DNS issues going on today? Anyways just wanted to see if anyone else > has a > > better explanation. > > > > —Jared > > > On Oct 21, 2016, at 1:38 PM, Kirk Lund <kl...@pivotal.io> wrote: > > > > > > I just did a pull and now I'm reviewing the formatters under etc/. > > > > > > -rw-rw-r-- 1 klund staff 36004 Oct 21 13:36 > > eclipse-java-google-style.xml > > > -rw-rw-r-- 1 klund staff 110 Sep 19 11:56 > > > eclipseOrganizeImports.importorder > > > -rw-rw-r-- 1 klund staff 20653 Oct 21 13:36 > > > intellij-java-google-style.xml > > > > > > What's the status of organizing imports? And do we still use > > > eclipseOrganizeImports.importorder for imports in Eclipse? > > > > > > Thanks, > > > Kirk > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 1:33 PM, Mark Bretl <asf.mbr...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > > > >> Thanks Jared for the suggestion of Spotless and follow-up work. > > >> > > >> This is now completed and checked into develop. As this does touch > many > > >> files, be prepared the next time you pull. > > >> > > >> --Mark > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 1:21 PM, Jared Stewart <jstew...@pivotal.io> > > >> wrote: > > >> > > >>> Done! :) > > >>> > > >>> - Jared > > >>>> On Oct 21, 2016, at 12:27 PM, Mark Bretl <asf.mbr...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > >>>> > > >>>> One more time! :) > > >>>> > > >>>> Conflicting files > > >>>> geode-core/src/test/java/org/apache/geode/disttx/ > > >> PRDistTXDUnitTest.java > > >>>> geode-core/src/test/java/org/apache/geode/disttx/ > > >>> PRDistTXWithVersionsDUnitTest.java > > >>>> geode-core/src/test/java/org/apache/geode/internal/cache/execute/ > > >>> PRTransactionDUnitTest.java > > >>>> > > >>>> --Mark > > >>>> > > >>>> On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 12:08 PM, Jared Stewart < > jstew...@pivotal.io> > > >>> wrote: > > >>>> > > >>>>> I just pulled and rebased onto develop, and force pushed into the > > >>> existing > > >>>>> pull request. It should be clean to merge in now. > > >>>>> > > >>>>> Thanks, > > >>>>> Jared > > >>>>>> On Oct 21, 2016, at 11:57 AM, Mark Bretl <asf.mbr...@gmail.com> > > >> wrote: > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> I believe there is enough consensus here to check this into > develop. > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> Jared, due to recent checkins into develop, can you update the > pull > > >>>>> request > > >>>>>> one more time? Trying to make this as clean as possible. I will > > check > > >>>>> into > > >>>>>> develop after the update, unless someone else gets to it first. > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> All, can we hold checkins on develop until the new formatter is > > >>> applied? > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> Thanks, > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> --Mark > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 9:03 AM, Kenneth Howe <kh...@pivotal.io> > > >>> wrote: > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>>> +1 > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> On Oct 21, 2016, at 8:27 AM, Bruce Schuchardt < > > >>> bschucha...@pivotal.io> > > >>>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> +1 > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> Le 10/20/2016 à 5:13 PM, Udo Kohlmeyer a écrit : > > >>>>>>>>> +1 > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> On 20/10/16 4:56 pm, Mark Bretl wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>> +1 as well... > > >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> - Pulled changes > > >>>>>>>>>> - Executed './gradlew clean build' and was successful. > > >>>>>>>>>> - Modified a couple of random files to test > > >>>>>>>>>> - Ran './gradlew clean build' again and failed expectedly > > >>>>>>>>>> - Ran './gradlew spotlessApply', task was successful > > >>>>>>>>>> - Ran './gradlew clean build' and succeeded > > >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> Great addition! As long as others are good with the formatter, > > >>> then I > > >>>>>>> am > > >>>>>>>>>> good. > > >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> --Mark > > >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 3:40 PM, Kirk Lund <kl...@apache.org> > > >>> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> +1 I just added my approval to the PR (and again here) > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 3:25 PM, Jared Stewart < > > >>> jstew...@pivotal.io > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> I have opened a pull request here < > https://github.com/apache/ > > >>>>>>>>>>>> incubator-geode/pull/268> to enable the Spotless plugin and > to > > >>>>>>> switch to > > >>>>>>>>>>>> the Google Java Style formatter templates. > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Oct 18, 2016, at 4:32 PM, Kirk Lund <kl...@pivotal.io> > > >>> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> For reference TRAC #38741 was a bug with the summary > > >>> "EOFException > > >>>>>>>>>>> during > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> deserialize on client update with copy-on-read=true" > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> -Kirk > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 4:27 PM, Jared Stewart < > > >>>>> jstew...@pivotal.io > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> To give everyone an update, using the Google Java Style > > >> eclipse > > >>>>>>>>>>> template > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> there is an issue spotlessCheck where fails for > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> geode-core/src/test/java/org/apache/geode/cache30/ > > >>>>>>>>>>>> Bug38741DUnitTest.java > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> even if you run it directly after spotlessApply. This > needs > > >> to > > >>> be > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> investigated and fixed before I can open a pull request to > > >>> enable > > >>>>>>>>>>>> spotless. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Oct 14, 2016, at 4:57 PM, Dan Smith < > dsm...@pivotal.io> > > >>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +1 - The formatting looks better now. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -Dan > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 11:06 AM, Jared Stewart < > > >>>>>>> jstew...@pivotal.io > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I agree that the formatter needs fixing up. Our wiki < > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/GEODE/Code+ > > >>>>>>> Style+Guide> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> says > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that we follow the Google Java Style guide, but that is > > not > > >>>>>>> actually > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> what’s > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in our formatter templates. I pushed a new branch < > > >>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/ > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> jaredjstewart/incubator-geode/tree/ > > >>> spotlessPluginGoogleStyle> > > >>>>>>> that > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> points > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> spotless at the actual Google Java Style template, and I > > >>> think > > >>>>> it > > >>>>>>>>>>>> makes > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> both of the examples you found look better. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Oct 13, 2016, at 10:11 AM, Dan Smith < > > >> dsm...@pivotal.io> > > >>>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +1 for adding this to ./gradlew build > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> But I think we might want to fix up the formatter a bit > > >>> before > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> reformatting > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the code. I tried running spotlessApply, and it did > some > > >>>>>>>>>>> unfortunate > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> reformatting of code to make it less readable. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> One problem is with method chaining. We have a few > > >> different > > >>>>>>>>>>> factory > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> APIs > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that encourage method chaining, and it put all the > method > > >>>>> calls > > >>>>>>> on > > >>>>>>>>>>> a > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> single > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> line. For example here's one change: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - ClientCacheFactory ccf = new > > ClientCacheFactory() > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> .addPoolServer(NetworkUtils.getServerHostName(server1. > > >>>>>>> getHost()), > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> port) > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - .set(SECURITY_CLIENT_AUTH_INIT, > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> UserPasswordAuthInit.class.getName() + ".create") > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - .set(SECURITY_PREFIX+"username", "root") > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - .set(SECURITY_PREFIX+"password", "root"); > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> + ClientCacheFactory ccf = new > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ClientCacheFactory().addPoolServer(NetworkUtils. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> getServerHostName(server1.getHost()), > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> port).set(SECURITY_CLIENT_AUTH_INIT, > > >>>>>>> UserPasswordAuthInit.class. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> getName() > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> + > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ".create").set(SECURITY_PREFIX + "username", > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> "root").set(SECURITY_PREFIX > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> + > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "password", "root"); > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I see a similar problem where it put array > initialization > > >>> all > > >>>>>>> on a > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> single > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> line: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> + public void testMultiColOrderByWithIndexRe > > >>>>>>> sultWithProjection() > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> throws > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Exception { > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> String queries[] = { > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> // Test case No. IUMR021 > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - "SELECT ID, description, createTime, pkid > FROM > > >>>>>>>>>>> /portfolio1 > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> pf1 > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> where ID > 10 order by ID desc, pkid desc ", > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - "SELECT ID, description, createTime, pkid > FROM > > >>>>>>>>>>> /portfolio1 > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> pf1 > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> where ID > 10 order by ID asc, pkid asc ", > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - "SELECT ID, description, createTime, pkid > FROM > > >>>>>>>>>>> /portfolio1 > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> pf1 > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> where ID > 10 and ID < 20 order by ID asc, pkid asc ", > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - "SELECT ID, description, createTime, pkid > FROM > > >>>>>>>>>>> /portfolio1 > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> pf1 > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> where ID > 10 and ID < 20 order by ID desc , pkid > desc", > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - "SELECT ID, description, createTime, pkid > FROM > > >>>>>>>>>>> /portfolio1 > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> pf1 > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> where ID >= 10 and ID <= 20 order by ID desc, pkid asc > ", > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - "SELECT ID, description, createTime, pkid > FROM > > >>>>>>>>>>> /portfolio1 > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> pf1 > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> where ID >= 10 and ID <= 20 order by ID asc, pkid > desc", > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - "SELECT ID, description, createTime, pkid > FROM > > >>>>>>>>>>> /portfolio1 > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> pf1 > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> where ID != 10 order by ID asc , pkid desc", > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - "SELECT ID, description, createTime, pkid > FROM > > >>>>>>>>>>> /portfolio1 > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> pf1 > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> where ID != 10 order by ID desc, pkid asc ", > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - "SELECT ID, description, createTime, pkid > FROM > > >>>>>>>>>>> /portfolio1 > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> pf1 > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> where ID > 10 order by ID desc, pkid desc limit 5", > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - "SELECT ID, description, createTime, pkid > FROM > > >>>>>>>>>>> /portfolio1 > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> pf1 > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> where ID > 10 order by ID asc, pkid asc limit 5", > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - "SELECT ID, description, createTime, pkid > FROM > > >>>>>>>>>>> /portfolio1 > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> pf1 > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> where ID > 10 and ID < 20 order by ID asc, pkid desc > > >> limit 5 > > >>>>> ", > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - "SELECT ID, description, createTime, pkid > FROM > > >>>>>>>>>>> /portfolio1 > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> pf1 > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> where ID > 10 and ID < 20 order by ID desc, pkid asc > > limit > > >>> 5", > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - "SELECT ID, description, createTime, pkid > FROM > > >>>>>>>>>>> /portfolio1 > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> pf1 > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> where ID >= 10 and ID <= 20 order by ID desc, pkid desc > > >>> limit > > >>>>>>> 5", > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - "SELECT ID, description, createTime, pkid > FROM > > >>>>>>>>>>> /portfolio1 > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> pf1 > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> where ID >= 10 and ID <= 20 order by ID asc, pkid asc > > >> limit > > >>>>> 5", > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - "SELECT ID, description, createTime, pkid > FROM > > >>>>>>>>>>> /portfolio1 > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> pf1 > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> where ID != 10 order by ID asc , pkid desc limit 10", > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - "SELECT ID, description, createTime, pkid > FROM > > >>>>>>>>>>> /portfolio1 > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> pf1 > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> where ID != 10 order by ID desc, pkid desc limit 10", > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - }; > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> + "SELECT ID, description, createTime, pkid > FROM > > >>>>>>>>>>> /portfolio1 > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> pf1 > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> where ID > 10 order by ID desc, pkid desc ", "SELECT > > ID, > > >>>>>>>>>>>> description, > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> createTime, pkid FROM /portfolio1 pf1 where ID > 10 > order > > >> by > > >>>>> ID > > >>>>>>>>>>> asc, > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> pkid > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> asc ", "SELECT ID, description, createTime, pkid FROM > > >>>>>>> /portfolio1 > > >>>>>>>>>>>> pf1 > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> where ID > 10 and ID < 20 order by ID asc, pkid asc ", > > >>> "SELECT > > >>>>>>>>>>> ID, > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> description, createTime, pkid FROM /portfolio1 pf1 > where > > >> ID > > >>>> > > >>>>> 10 > > >>>>>>>>>>> and > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> ID < > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 20 order by ID desc , pkid desc", "SELECT ID, > > >> description, > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> createTime, > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> pkid FROM /portfolio1 pf1 where ID >= 10 and ID <= 20 > > >> order > > >>> by > > >>>>>>> ID > > >>>>>>>>>>>> desc, > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> pkid asc ", "SELECT ID, description, createTime, pkid > > >> FROM > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> /portfolio1 > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> pf1 where ID >= 10 and ID <= 20 order by ID asc, pkid > > >> desc", > > >>>>>>>>>>> "SELECT > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ID, > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> description, createTime, pkid FROM /portfolio1 pf1 > where > > >> ID > > >>> != > > >>>>>>> 10 > > >>>>>>>>>>>> order > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> by > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ID asc , pkid desc", "SELECT ID, description, > > >> createTime, > > >>>>> pkid > > >>>>>>>>>>> FROM > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> /portfolio1 pf1 where ID != 10 order by ID desc, pkid > asc > > >> ", > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> + "SELECT ID, description, createTime, pkid > FROM > > >>>>>>>>>>> /portfolio1 > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> pf1 > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> where ID > 10 order by ID desc, pkid desc limit 5", > > >> "SELECT > > >>>>>>> ID, > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> description, createTime, pkid FROM /portfolio1 pf1 > where > > >> ID > > >>>> > > >>>>> 10 > > >>>>>>>>>>>> order > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> by > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ID asc, pkid asc limit 5", "SELECT ID, description, > > >>>>>>> createTime, > > >>>>>>>>>>>> pkid > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> FROM > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> /portfolio1 pf1 where ID > 10 and ID < 20 order by ID > > asc, > > >>>>> pkid > > >>>>>>>>>>> desc > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> limit > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 5 ", "SELECT ID, description, createTime, pkid FROM > > >>>>>>> /portfolio1 > > >>>>>>>>>>> pf1 > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> where > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ID > 10 and ID < 20 order by ID desc, pkid asc limit > 5", > > >>>>> "SELECT > > >>>>>>>>>>>> ID, > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> description, createTime, pkid FROM /portfolio1 pf1 > where > > >> ID > > >>>> = > > >>>>>>> 10 > > >>>>>>>>>>> and > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> ID > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <= > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 20 order by ID desc, pkid desc limit 5", "SELECT ID, > > >>>>>>> description, > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> createTime, pkid FROM /portfolio1 pf1 where ID >= 10 > and > > >> ID > > >>> <= > > >>>>>>> 20 > > >>>>>>>>>>>> order > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> by > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ID asc, pkid asc limit 5", "SELECT ID, description, > > >>>>>>> createTime, > > >>>>>>>>>>>> pkid > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> FROM > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> /portfolio1 pf1 where ID != 10 order by ID asc , pkid > > desc > > >>>>> limit > > >>>>>>>>>>> 10", > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "SELECT ID, description, createTime, pkid FROM > > >> /portfolio1 > > >>>>> pf1 > > >>>>>>>>>>>> where > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> ID > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> != 10 order by ID desc, pkid desc limit 10", > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> + > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> + }; > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 9:51 AM, Jared Stewart < > > >>>>>>>>>>> jstew...@pivotal.io> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The task is fully suppressible with -x spotlessCheck. > > >>> Also, > > >>>>> if > > >>>>>>>>>>> you > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> have > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> any formatter errors you can automatically fix them > with > > >>>>>>> 'gradle > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> spotlessApply’. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Oct 13, 2016, at 9:40 AM, Kevin Duling < > > >>>>> kdul...@pivotal.io > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If we made formatting a warning, then people would > > >>> probably > > >>>>>>>>>>> quickly > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ignore > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If we made formatting an error, we need to be sure we > > >>> don't > > >>>>>>> get > > >>>>>>>>>>> in > > >>>>>>>>>>>> to > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> situation where <editor of choice>'s formatter is not > > in > > >>>>>>>>>>> agreement > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> with > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> build's checker. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I can live with an additional 17 seconds as well. > And > > >>>>> Jared's > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> already > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> reduced the build time locally by 50%. But I still > > want > > >>> the > > >>>>>>>>>>>> ability > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> to > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> suppress the check similar to -x javadoc. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 9:58 PM, William Markito < > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> wmark...@pivotal.io> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> This sounds really good to me as well. +1 > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 4:13 PM, Jared Stewart < > > >>>>>>>>>>>> jstew...@pivotal.io > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> This is running locally on my laptop. Since > Spotless > > >> is > > >>>>>>> only > > >>>>>>>>>>>> doing > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> code > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> formatting and not any other static analysis, it > > >> already > > >>>>>>> has 0 > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> errors. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (Other than, of course, formatting not consistent > > with > > >>> the > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> template.) > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Oct 12, 2016, at 4:11 PM, Kenneth Howe < > > >>>>>>> kh...@pivotal.io> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Agree with Mark, this has to work with 0 errors > > >> before > > >>> it > > >>>>>>>>>>> would > > >>>>>>>>>>>> be > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> useful in precheckin. I think I could live with an > > >>>>>>> additional > > >>>>>>>>>>> 17 > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> seconds > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> most of the time for running the spotlessCheck as > > >>>>> suggested. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Jared, Is that 17 seconds running locally on your > > >>> laptop > > >>>>> or > > >>>>>>>>>>> on a > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> more > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> capable machine? > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Ken > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Oct 12, 2016, at 3:39 PM, Jared Stewart < > > >>>>>>>>>>>> jstew...@pivotal.io> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If you want to try it out, I pushed a branch to > my > > >>> Geode > > >>>>>>> repo > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> that > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> contains this change: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/ > jaredjstewart/incubator-geode/ > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> tree/spotlessPlugin > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> < > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/jaredjstewart/incubator-geode/ > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> tree/spotlessPlugin > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Oct 12, 2016, at 2:27 PM, Darrel Schneider < > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dschnei...@pivotal.io > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I like Dan's idea of catching formatting issues > > >>> earlier > > >>>>>>> but > > >>>>>>>>>>> I > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> think > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> adding > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 5-10 minutes to "build" would be too much. > > >> Currently > > >>>>> when > > >>>>>>>>>>> I'm > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> trying > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to do > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a quick build I use -xjavadoc. I'd probably do > the > > >>> same > > >>>>>>> for > > >>>>>>>>>>>> this > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> target if > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it was part of build until I'm ready to do a > > >>>>> precheckin. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mark, wouldn't running the formatter on all our > > >> java > > >>>>>>> files > > >>>>>>>>>>> and > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> checking > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> them in get these issues down to 0? > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 12:53 PM, Udo Kohlmeyer > < > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ukohlme...@pivotal.io > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +1 - adding checkstyle to precheckin. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If the developer uses the provided templates ( > > >>>>> eclipse + > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> intellij) > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> then > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> most of the formatting issues should be handled > > >>> before > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> precheckin. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Also, if > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a developer has a questionable coding style, > that > > >>>>> should > > >>>>>>>>>>>> lessen > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> as > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> developer will have resolve the issues before > > >> being > > >>>>>>> able to > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> commit. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I also believe that this should not be an > > >>> overbearing > > >>>>>>> and > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> intrusive > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> process. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --Udo > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 13/10/16 6:36 am, Mark Bretl wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Dan, > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> There is some extra amount of time, 5-10 > minutes > > >>>>> extra > > >>>>>>> for > > >>>>>>>>>>>> the > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> entire > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> project (depending on your CPU). I think the > > real > > >>>>>>> issue to > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> adding > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> precheckin target and have it be 'effective' > is > > >> it > > >>>>>>> needs > > >>>>>>>>>>> to > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> run > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> successfully, otherwise it would turn into > noise > > >>> most > > >>>>>>> of > > >>>>>>>>>>> the > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> time > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> think. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> We need to get the issues down to 0 or manage > to > > >>> set > > >>>>> a > > >>>>>>> new > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> baseline > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (not > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the best idea), which is a lot of work, to > make > > >> it > > >>>>> run > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> successfully. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Right > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> now, if you run the target, it will fail every > > >> time > > >>>>>>> since > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> there > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> outstanding > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> issues in the code and very hard to tell what > > >>> issues > > >>>>>>> were > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> introduced. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --Mark > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 11:34 AM, Dan Smith < > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> dsm...@pivotal.io> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Seems like it should run as part of the build > > >>> target. > > >>>>>>> The > > >>>>>>>>>>>> only > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> reason to > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> make it part of precheckin is if it takes a > > long > > >>>>> time, > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> otherwise > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> people > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> should get fast feedback they need to change > > >> their > > >>>>>>> code > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> before > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> they > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> push. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -Dan > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 11:24 AM, Jared > Stewart > > >> < > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> jstew...@pivotal.io> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +1 to running during the precheckin target as > > >> well > > >>>>> as > > >>>>>>>>>>>> Travis > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> CI > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Oct 12, 2016 11:20 AM, "Darrel > Schneider" < > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dschnei...@pivotal.io> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If Travis CI is only run on pull requests > then > > >>> that > > >>>>>>> is > > >>>>>>>>>>> not > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> enough > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> because > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> committers do not submit pull requests. > Having > > >> it > > >>>>> run > > >>>>>>>>>>>> during > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gradle > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> build or precheckin target is also needed. > In > > >>>>>>> addition > > >>>>>>>>>>> to > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> also > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wanted PRs to be checked. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 11:12 AM, Jared > > >> Stewart > > >>> < > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> jstew...@pivotal.io> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It would certainly be necessary to make > sure > > >>> that > > >>>>>>> the > > >>>>>>>>>>>> code > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> style > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> be > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> enforced is sensible, e.g. doe not use > > wildcard > > >>>>>>> imports. > > >>>>>>>>>>>> We > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> would > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> also > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> want to make one large commit to format all > > >>>>> existing > > >>>>>>>>>>> code > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> before > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> turning > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this on. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mark - Thank you for the information about > > >> the > > >>>>>>>>>>> existing > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> setup. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mark, Darrel, Kevin - Given all of your > > >>>>> comments, I > > >>>>>>>>>>>> think > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> it > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> might > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> make > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> more sense to add the flag to enable it in > > >> Travis > > >>>>> CI > > >>>>>>>>>>>> rather > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> than > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> as > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> part > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of the build. This way your build pass > > >>>>> regardless > > >>>>>>> of > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> whitespace, > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> but > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CI job would fail on PRs if they did not > > >> adhere > > >>>>> to > > >>>>>>> the > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> standard > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> formatting. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Anthony - It doesn’t seem to me that > turning > > >>> this > > >>>>>>> on > > >>>>>>>>>>>> would > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> have > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> effect > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of combining reformatting commits and > logic > > >>>>>>> changes. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Rather, > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> since > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> all > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> code would already be formatted, there would > > no > > >>>>>>> longer > > >>>>>>>>>>> be > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> any > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> reformatting > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> commits except for single large commits > when > > >>> the > > >>>>>>> code > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> style > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> file > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> was > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> updated. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Oct 12, 2016, at 11:01 AM, Bruce > > >> Schuchardt > > >>> < > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> bschucha...@pivotal.io > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I like the idea of doing this but I > don't > > >>> think > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Checkstyle > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> should > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> be > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> enabled until all of the code is > reformatted. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Also, last time I checked there was > still > > a > > >>>>>>> problem > > >>>>>>>>>>>> with > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IntelliJ > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> auto-format settings. It still used > wildcard > > >>>>>>> imports, > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> which I > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> believe > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> we > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> don't allow. I've manually changed my > > >> settings > > >>> in > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Editor->Code > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Style->Java > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to "Use single class import" to correct > that > > >>>>>>>>>>> problem. I > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> couldn't see > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> how > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to get Gradle to do it. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Le 10/12/2016 à 10:28 AM, Anthony Baker > a > > >>> écrit > > >>>>> : > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Source code with a consistent > > look-and-feel > > >>>>>>> makes it > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> easier > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> people > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to join the project community and > contribute. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Let’s continue to keep reformatting > > commits > > >>>>>>> separate > > >>>>>>>>>>>> from > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> logic > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> changes—otherwise it’s too hard to > review. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Anthony > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Oct 12, 2016, at 10:06 AM, Dan > Smith < > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dsm...@pivotal.io> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +1 > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> This might be a good time to reformat > > the > > >>> code > > >>>>>>>>>>> since > > >>>>>>>>>>>> I > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> don't > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> think > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> there > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> are too many long lived feature branches > > >>>>>>> outstanding. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -Dan > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 10:00 AM, > Jared > > >>>>> Stewart > > >>>>>>> < > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> jstew...@pivotal.io > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I would like to advocate for adding a > > >>>>> Checkstyle < > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://checkstyle > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> . > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> sourceforge.net/> or Spotless < > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/diffplug/ > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> spotless > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gradle task to our build process to ensure > > >> that > > >>>>> all > > >>>>>>>>>>> code > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> checked > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> meets > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the formatting standards described on > the > > >>> wiki < > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/ > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> confluence/display/GEODE/Code+ > Style+Guide> > > >>> (and > > >>>>>>> in > > >>>>>>>>>>> the > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> intellij/eclipse > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> formatter xml files in our repository). > > This > > >>>>> will > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> alleviate > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> difficulties > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> reviewing code when whitespace or > > formatting > > >>> has > > >>>>>>>>>>>> changed > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> since > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> all > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> code > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> checked in will already comply with > > >> standards. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ~/William > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >> > > > -- ~/William
