------ Robin Anil
On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 9:30 AM, Jeff Eastman <[email protected]>wrote: > +1 If we are going to have some coding standards then let's enforce them. > That might make us actually figure out how to get Eclipse and IntelliJ > formatting in synch. There are also a number of code quality rules that can > be enabled in these tools (I'm most familiar with those in Eclipse) and > publishing a standard set of these options for each tool in addition to the > formatting conventions would be a big improvement. Enforcing PMD and > checkstyle consistency in maven seems like a useful bar to set but can this > be enabled for new checkins only? I'm afraid we would never get a clean > build if any of the current issues becomes a show-stopper. > > Does it have a threshold option? Like fail if issue count > 100 (or whatever number is there at the moment) and strive to decrease that number with each patch. Robin > > > On 6/10/12 10:17 PM, Robin Anil wrote: > >> Do it! >> On Jun 10, 2012 9:09 PM, "Benson >> Margulies"<bimargulies@gmail.**com<[email protected]>> >> wrote: >> >> I hesitate to remind you all that the maven plugins can be wired up >>> for at least checkstyle and PMD as parts of the build that *fail*, not >>> just report, and that several other Apache projects live very happily >>> this way. This makes it pretty nearly impossible to check in code that >>> doesn't meet whatever standards are configured. >>> >>> >>> On Sun, Jun 10, 2012 at 5:19 PM, Robin Anil<[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Grant, you mentioned you have some documented steps to hookup Jira patch >>>> submit with jenkins. Can you share those. Findbugs/Checkstyle/Pmd/Clover >>>> >>> is >>> >>>> already integrated in our Jenkins build. I bet we should be able to get >>>> decent stats on each patch. To me that's a more sustainable process >>>> after >>>> doing a one time massive fix. >>>> >>>> Robin >>>> >>>> >>>> On Sun, Jun 10, 2012 at 12:03 PM, Grant Ingersoll<[email protected] >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>> On Jun 9, 2012, at 7:17 PM, Sean Owen wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Guys, I'm preparing a large new patch that fixes style problems in the >>>>>> code, for after the code freeze. This is my last pass at this for >>>>>> Mahout. >>>>>> >>>>>> Style is not a big deal, though it's probably not good that random >>>>>> non-standard Java is committed to the project. The only hard 'fix' for >>>>>> this long-standing phenomenon is requiring a review process, and that >>>>>> is too much. I don't think this project adheres to standards so much, >>>>>> and such is life. >>>>>> >>>>> Perhaps we should at least clean up style before every release. I've >>>>> >>>> seen >>> >>>> other projects do this and while it isn't perfect, it does mean that we >>>>> start from a clean slate every time. >>>>> >>>>> Naturally, committers can also stylize right before committing, too. >>>>> >>>> This >>> >>>> usually reduces the burden on the contributor, but keeps the code base >>>>> >>>> in >>> >>>> good form. >>>>> >>>>> However, simply turning on code inspections in a modern IDE like >>>>>> IntelilJ is turning up plain bugs in the code. I want to call out a >>>>>> few, because I want to fix them (after 0.7), but also because I want >>>>>> to make the point that static analysis can find bugs. Because it can, >>>>>> it should. I think open source projects can and should be the finest >>>>>> output of the best and brightest. And at "mere" Google, stuff that >>>>>> static analysis finds would never have gotten to even code review. >>>>>> Hence I am somewhat dismayed to see so many problems being committed >>>>>> without review into the code base. >>>>>> >>>>> +1. >>>>> >>>>> -Grant >>>>> >>>> >
