Started https://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewLog.html?buildId=1164002 <https://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewQueued.html?itemId=1163998> with Aleksey’s inspections profile. Core (long) and AOP (short) modules will be tested as example.
> On 27 Mar 2018, at 19:38, Dmitry Pavlov <dpavlov....@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi Petr, > > Could you please take inspections and run it on AI code base in > https://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewType.html?buildTypeId=IgniteTests24Java8_InspectionsCore&branch_IgniteTests24Java8=%3Cdefault%3E&tab=buildTypeStatusDiv > ? > > Sincerely, > Dmitriy Pavlov > > вт, 27 мар. 2018 г. в 19:27, Dmitry Pavlov <dpavlov....@gmail.com>: > >> Alexey, thank you for bring this topic to top. >> >> What do you think about committing this inspections into Ignite code base? >> >> What can be our next steps after demonstrating CI check is possible >> https://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewType.html?buildTypeId=IgniteTests24Java8_InspectionsCore&branch_IgniteTests24Java8=%3Cdefault%3E&tab=buildTypeStatusDiv >> ? >> >> Sincerely, >> Dmitriy Pavlov >> >> вт, 27 мар. 2018 г. в 15:28, Alexey Goncharuk <alexey.goncha...@gmail.com >>> : >> >>> Bumping up. >>> >>> Attached is my local inspections profile exported from Idea. Let's run >>> the first iteration and check if it differs significantly from other >>> community members. >>> >>> --AG >>> >>> 2018-03-19 16:39 GMT+03:00 Petr Ivanov <mr.wei...@gmail.com>: >>> >>>> Filed https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-7985 < >>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-7985> [1]. >>> >>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> On 18 Mar 2018, at 00:56, Dmitry Pavlov <dpavlov....@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Hello Petr, >>>>> >>>>> Many members of the community would appreciate such additional code >>>> control, and it's a pity that no one made this happen. Agree? >>>>> >>>>> Could you please pick up this activity? >>>>> >>>>> It might be an idea to create 'IDEA Inspections' step to be run in >>>> parallel with 'Build Apache Ignite'. WDYT? Would it work? >>>>> >>>>> Sincerely, >>>>> Dmitriy Pavlov >>>>> >>>> >>>> https://confluence.jetbrains.com/display/TCD10/Inspections < >>>> https://confluence.jetbrains.com/display/TCD10/Inspections> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> пн, 12 мар. 2018 г. в 14:37, Dmitry Pavlov <dpavlov....@gmail.com >>>> <mailto:dpavlov....@gmail.com>>: >>> >>> >>>>> Hi Dmitriy, >>>>> >>>>> would you pick up this activity? >>>>> >>>>> Sincerely, >>>>> Dmitriy Pavlov >>>>> >>>> >>>> вт, 6 мар. 2018 г. в 14:09, Dmitry Pavlov <dpavlov....@gmail.com >>>> <mailto:dpavlov....@gmail.com>>: >>> >>> >>>>> What I can suggest now it is to take XML file with existing as is from >>>> previous topic (I remember someone in community already prepared settings) >>>> and set up TeamCity Run configuration as part of Run All Basic Tests (per >>>> commit basis). >>>>> >>>>> If we don’t have XML, I suggest to enable build-in Idea inspections >>>> 'as is' on TeamCity and iteratively improve it according to found issues. >>>>> >>>>> Dmitriy G., would you prepare PR and proof-of-concept TC run >>>> configuration? >>>>> >>>>> As discussion became really active, I think that means community is >>>> interested in static code checks. >>>>> >>>> >>>> вт, 6 мар. 2018 г. в 14:08, Dmitry Pavlov <dpavlov....@gmail.com >>>> <mailto:dpavlov....@gmail.com>>: >>> >>> >>>>> I was thinking about some quick check, which will automatically >>>> require minimum runs. Now, any committer can push changes to the master, >>>> which break not only the inspection and style, but even the compilation. If >>>> this control would be automatic, it can allow us make codebase better quite >>>> fast. But I am afraid it is not realistic. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> вт, 6 мар. 2018 г. в 13:42, Petr Ivanov <mr.wei...@gmail.com <mailto: >>>> mr.wei...@gmail.com>>: >>> >>> >>>>> Sonar is powerful, yes, but it’s power in thoroughness. I.e. it does >>>> its job well in cases of leisurely post-build analysis. >>>>> >>>>> I’d suggest we use it (if we will use it) in the following scenarios: >>>>> — some basic checks Sonar profile for Blocker bugs (it is fast) — >>>> something that cannot be passed to master; >>>>> — nightly or even weekly run with Full Sonar profile (600+ checks >>>> from Firebug, Codestyle, Coverage, etc.) for regression and overall code >>>> quality improvement goals. >>>>> >>>>> Did not quite get you about push-to-master prohibition. Can you >>>> explain scenario in more details? >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> On 6 Mar 2018, at 13:27, Dmitry Pavlov <dpavlov....@gmail.com >>>> <mailto:dpavlov....@gmail.com>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Petr, I've heard Sonar is powerful tool. >>>>>> >>>>>> Would it help us to prohibit commits to master w/o test run / too >>>> much >>>>>> failed tests / too much inspection errors appeared? >>>>>> >>>> >>>>> вт, 6 мар. 2018 г. в 13:22, Alexey Goncharuk < >>>> alexey.goncha...@gmail.com <mailto:alexey.goncha...@gmail.com>>: >>> >>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> Dmitriy, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I like this idea a lot. For example, the inspection profile should >>>> have >>>>>>> inspection 'Anonymous class can be converted to lambda' disabled >>>> because >>>>>>> quite a lot of such classes can be sent over the network (although >>>> even >>>>>>> anonymous classes are discourage for such purposes). >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I believe we can start with sharing somehow one of the profiles and >>>> then >>>>>>> iteratively improving it until the community is satisfied with the >>>> result. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Thoughts? >>>>>>> >>>> >>>>>> 2018-03-06 12:06 GMT+03:00 Petr Ivanov <mr.wei...@gmail.com <mailto: >>>> mr.wei...@gmail.com>>: >>> >>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> We can use Sonar as instrument for code analysis and test coverage >>>>>>>> inspections. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On 6 Mar 2018, at 11:28, Dmitriy Govorukhin < >>>>>>>> dmitriy.govoruk...@gmail.com <mailto:dmitriy.govoruk...@gmail.com>> >>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Dmitriy, >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> As I understood, preview topic was of static code analysis in >>>> general. >>>>>>>>> In this topic, I want to discuss only idea inspection rule. >>>>>>>>> In future, of course, we can expаnd this rule to the TeamCity >>>> build. >>>>>>>>> >>>> >>>>>>>> On Tue, Mar 6, 2018 at 11:16 AM, Nikolay Izhikov < >>>> nizhi...@apache.org <mailto:nizhi...@apache.org>> >>> >>> >>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Hello, Igniters. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> +1 to automatic code style tools. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Let's make it already! >>>>>>>>>> Do we have a ticket for it? >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Related discussion - >>>> >>>>>> http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble < >>>> http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble/>. >>> >>> >>>>>>>>>> com/Static-code-analysis-for-Java-td22195.html >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> В Вт, 06/03/2018 в 08:15 +0000, Dmitry Pavlov пишет: >>>>>>>>>>> Hi Dmitriy, >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> I think we should resurrect thread about addition of code >>>>>>> inspections, >>>>>>>>>> and >>>>>>>>>>> later we can enable automatic control step to TeamCity. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Could you help me to find it? >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> вт, 6 мар. 2018 г. в 11:11, Dmitriy Govorukhin < >>>> >>>>>>>>> dmitriy.govoruk...@gmail.com <mailto:dmitriy.govoruk...@gmail.com >>>>> >>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> : >>>>>>>>>>>> Hi folks, >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Do we have 'inspection' [1] scheme for ignite? >>>>>>>>>>>> I see a lot of warnings in my code, and I guess it is because >>>>>>> everyone >>>>>>>>>> uses >>>>>>>>>>>> different schemes. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Let's start the discussion. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> [1] IDEA inspection >>>> >>>>>>>>>>> <https://www.jetbrains.com/help/idea/code-inspection.html < >>>> https://www.jetbrains.com/help/idea/code-inspection.html>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>
