For a long while on my local checkout, I have svn:ignore at the root level set to ‘*’. I really think we should consider committing this; I think I’ve advocated for it before.
RE “precommit” being a pain — yeah but, like Mike already said, it catches problems. At least it’s faster lately than it used to be months ago. On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 5:16 AM Michael McCandless < luc...@mikemccandless.com> wrote: > On Wed, May 20, 2015 at 11:38 PM, Yonik Seeley <ysee...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Seems like a bug in javadoc if it fails on valid java code with no > > javadoc specified on the involved classes. > > > >> if you'd run "ant precommit" you would have gotten the same error, and > >> (if you hadn't understood the problem) you could have asked about it > >> before breaking the build. > > > > I normally only make sure unit tests pass. > > Please understand that by taking this attitude you waste everyone > else's time who does want to pass "ant precommit" before committing, > and everyone else's time to scan all these broken builds emails. > > If you truly refuse to pass "ant precommit" before committing, at > least be vigilant and watch the next few builds to see if you broke > them, and then fix it quickly. > > > "ant precommit" is way to picky. > > I agree it's picky but I think that's a feature, not a bug :) > > It is this way so it catches common errors that unit tests don't > catch: a leftover #nocommit, wrong svn props, forgot to svn add, etc. > Over time we've made it more picky each time one of us falls into a > trap of forgetting to do XYZ before committing. > > And in this case it looks like it caught something truly wrong with > your change (a public API using a package-private class). Had you run > it before hand and paid attention to what it said you could have fixed > it... > > My biggest complaint is how slow it is ... I wish we could improve that. > > > For example it will fail if one as > > any extra files lying around (which is normally the case for active > > development / debugging). Doing a clean checkout and re-applying the > > patch just to make "ant precommit" happy is too high of a hurdle. My > > guess is that most committers don't use it for the majority of > > commits. > > This is to try to help you remember to "svn add" files. Why not store > such files outside of the source tree? Or maybe we can add them to > svn:ignore? > > Mike McCandless > > http://blog.mikemccandless.com > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org > >
