Dear developers, When going over your way of working adopted with Apache Kafka, I was wondering about the following:
*1) Visualizing Technical Debt* Based on my findings (with FindBugs, CheckStyle and JaCoCo), I concluded that Kafka's codebase has a good overall quality with regard to the architecture and individual lines of code (great work!). I was however wondering, have you ever considered to also include reports from e.g. Sonarqube to make this quality more visuable? I believe it's nice for programmers to see that they are delivering a good job (through e.g. the Sonarqube panel after fixing some issues with regard to technical debt), but technical debt would also become even more manageable through the adoption of such a tool (with regard to the latter, one could also think of e.g. using CodeCity). *2) Adaptations from FindBugs and CheckStyle's defaults* Based on the findbugs-exclude.xml and checkstyle.xml, I found that you have decided to deviate from some default values (e.g. exluding bugs with regard to MS (Malicious code vulnerabilities) and NPathComplexity of max 500 instead of the default 200). Is there any documentation on the decision made for these deviations? Or, if not, could you elaborate upon your choices? Thank you very much in advance! Kind regards, Daan Rennings P.S. I am with a team of students from Delft University of Technology, trying to analyze Apache Kafka as part of the course "IN4315 Software Architecture" which will publish it's findings in a GitBook (for more information, please have a look at https://avandeursen.com/2017/01/15/the-collaborative-software-architecture-course/). Answers to both questions would be useful for our analysis of Apache Kafka.
