I don't think that we have many pending patches at the moment anyway. Let's get a big batch style points in the bag while Tom has the energy to do the work.
Sent from my iPhone On Mar 8, 2012, at 9:44 PM, Jake Mannix <jake.man...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, Mar 8, 2012 at 9:10 PM, tom pierce <t...@apache.org> wrote: > >> I could support this plan, but it might be hard to say something like "ok, >> this week we're lowering the threshold another 50 warnings - no more >> commits until we're passing again!". It's the sort of thing that is easy >> to keep deferring until you eventually forget you meant to do it. >> >> I guess I'm a "just rip the band-aid off" kind of guy; suffer quickly and >> move on. Speaking of that, any feedback on MAHOUT-987? > > > Historically I've been a strong opponent of big batch "fix a ton of > whitespace" commits, because it makes for ugly commit/blame history, > potentially invalidates patches, and similarly makes for merging other > branches (i.e. on GitHub) painful. > > I'm not sure if I have enough strength left in me to hold to that argument, > as my "broken windows theory" sense is deeply offended by the way I've > already gone way past "might" bitbucket the "unstable Jenkins build" > emails, and into "am totally ignoring it because it's noise"-land. > > So I guess I'm surprisingly enough a +1 on this ticket, at present. We > should hear back from more of a quorum on a commit that hits so many files > in different places. > > -jake > > >> >> >> -tom >> >> >> On 03/08/2012 11:25 AM, Jeff Eastman wrote: >> >>> +1 I'd like to see Jenkins become a reliable health indication and >>> setting the fb/pmd/cs bar too low does us no service unless we are prepared >>> to take those warnings seriously. Is it possible to raise the bar to where >>> we are "ok" again and then agree to lower it periodically to get us to >>> improve our hygiene index? >>> >>> >>> On 3/7/12 7:04 PM, Tom Pierce wrote: >>> >>>> Well we already have that in a sense - all the tests still run and we >>>> can see which fail even if findbugs/pmd/checkstyle have lots of >>>> complaints. >>>> >>>> My concern would be having 2 separate Jenkins tasks would make it even >>>> easier to ignore the non-test warnings. >>>> >>>> I'd much rather make "mvn test" fail when findbugs/pmd/checkstyle >>>> counts go up, or drop those tasks from Jenkins entirely. This would >>>> let us all test against the same rules as Jenkins in a straightforward >>>> way. >>>> >>>> I'm only bringing this up because it bugs me that I'm starting to >>>> mentally bit-bucket "build is unstable" email, which is a terrible >>>> habit. >>>> >>>> -tom >>>> >>>> On Wed, Mar 7, 2012 at 3:59 PM, Dmitriy Lyubimov<dlie...@gmail.com> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 10:04 PM, Paritosh Ranjan<pran...@xebia.com> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> About Jenkins: >>>>>> Will it be good to create separate maven profiles executed using >>>>>> separate >>>>>> Jenkins jobs for >>>>>> a) normal build without findbugs/checkstyle/pmd etc >>>>>> b) quality build with findbugs/checkstyle/pmd >>>>>> >>>>> Is it the intended distinction between normal and quality build? if >>>>> yes, +1, seems reasonable. >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>
