Thanks for correcting this. HBASE-5598 it is. Jon.
On Sat, Mar 24, 2012 at 6:57 PM, lars hofhansl <[email protected]> wrote: > I think you mean HBASE-5598 ;) > > > > ________________________________ > From: Jonathan Hsieh <[email protected]> > To: [email protected] > Sent: Saturday, March 24, 2012 6:38 PM > Subject: [proposal] Findbugs to 0 policy in trunk once we get to findbugs > 0. (HBASE-5589) > > Hey all, > > I brought this up in jira (HBASE-5589) and stack suggested posting to dev@ > , > so here's a proposal > > Currently we are somewhere around the 770 warnings/errors mark on trunk, > and our hadoopqa bot will soon start complaining again as code gets checked > in. Since many patches in flight and since it may be a bit onerous for > committers to enforce a no new findbugs policy right away, what do you all > think about committers enforcing a no-new-findbugs errors policy on > reviews once > this we finally get the findbugs warnings to 0? > > To knock down the findbugs violation number, we should probably chop this > into subtasks to break down the workload. Ideally we'd first fix > warnings/errors, and then for remaining spurious warnings (like System.exit > in some tools), we use an excludes file as opposed to marking up code with > findbugs-specific annotations since this may require the inclusion of a GPL > licensed jar. (On a previous project, the findbugs annotation jar was GPL'd > which causes license problems, maybe different now). > > Sound good? > > Jon > > -- > // Jonathan Hsieh (shay) > // Software Engineer, Cloudera > // [email protected] > -- // Jonathan Hsieh (shay) // Software Engineer, Cloudera // [email protected]
