I don't think anyone is pretending anything. :-) The point is simply
we can't do everything at the same time -- but since you care about
these kinds of issues, you're very welcome to review them, there's
nothing stopping you.

I agree we do need to document our desired coding style and need to
set up guidelines -- would you like to work on that too? Here's the
standard NetBeans code conventions as a starting point:

https://netbeans.org/community/guidelines/code-conventions.html

Gj

On Sat, Jan 13, 2018 at 12:10 PM, Gili T. <[email protected]> wrote:
> It seems to me that maybe you need to document your desired coding style
> and perhaps ask people to break PRs into smaller pieces but beyond that I
> see nothing wrong with someone reducing the number of compiler warnings in
> a PR and nothing else.
>
> Code hygine is a necessary part of software development. To pretend you can
> wish it away rarely leads to positive outcomes for end-users.
>
> Gili
>
> On Sat, Jan 13, 2018, 05:51 Geertjan Wielenga <
> [email protected]> wrote:
>
>> OK, here it is: https://github.com/apache/incubator-netbeans/pull/361
>>
>> Looking forward to your review,
>>
>> Gj
>>
>> On Sat, Jan 13, 2018 at 11:47 AM, Gili T. <[email protected]> wrote:
>> > I guess I'll be the odd man out: the bigger the project the more relevant
>> > cosmetic fixes are in my opinion. Why? Because in the 10+ years I've used
>> > NetBean, bug fixes were more important to me than new features. Cosmetic
>> > fixes tend to reduce the bug count at the cost of new features and I'm
>> > certainly in favor of that at the moment.
>> >
>> > Gili
>> >
>> > On Sat, Jan 13, 2018, 02:35 Antonio <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >
>> >> Hi,
>> >>
>> >> My 2 cents: I agree with Geertjan: I think we should concentrate our
>> >> efforts in the best NetBeans 9 we can build for users. There're many
>> >> important things to do, ranging from the website to the jdk-javac
>> >> branch. And many new tools to control, ranging from the wiki to the very
>> >> slow JIRA issue tracker.
>> >>
>> >> I think we should stay focused in those things that worry users, for the
>> >> benefit of the users, and leave those code-cosmetic, internal changes
>> >> for later on. After all NetBeans users deserve the best IDE we can
>> >> build, and it does not really matter to them if we're improving the
>> >> readability of ternary operators or if we're replacing for loops with
>> >> the Streaming API.
>> >>
>> >> NetBeans is the second Apache project by size (as per [1]), with more
>> >> than 5.5M lines of code. Making those millions of lines of code more
>> >> readable & pretty may be a perfect academic case study, but spending our
>> >> efforts on those areas won't make our users more happy.
>> >>
>> >> Cheers,
>> >> Antonio
>> >>
>> >> [1]
>> >> Apache in 2017 - By The Digits
>> >> https://blogs.apache.org/foundation/entry/apache-in-2017-by-the
>> >>
>> >> On 12/01/18 11:54, Geertjan Wielenga wrote:
>> >> > On Friday, January 12, 2018, Christian Lenz <[email protected]>
>> >> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >> Hi,
>> >> >>
>> >> >> first, in my opinion each PR is welcome, why not cosmetic stuff too?
>> >> There
>> >> >> is always a need to refactor code to make it more readable,
>> maintainable
>> >> >> and sometimes or more often it makes stuff faster. So why not
>> accepting
>> >> >> everything?
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > The concern is that we could end up with hundreds of PRs that are
>> nothing
>> >> > more than small tweaks for no clear reason, drowning out PRs such as
>> >> yours
>> >> > that provide new meaningful features.
>> >> >
>> >> > We do need to discuss this, probably in a new thread, but I’d suggest
>> >> each
>> >> > PR needs to start off with a new issue describing exactly what the
>> >> problem
>> >> > is, with the proposed solution, followed by some discussion, after
>> which
>> >> a
>> >> > PR is made. Refactoring for the sake of refactoring, without any
>> planning
>> >> > or motivation, could lead to chaos.
>> >> >
>> >> > Gj
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Yes I think we need guidelines too. Like „when do we need Tests“,
>> „how a
>> >> >> commit should look like“, etc. and we need more branches. I mean atm
>> we
>> >> >> have develop, master and some feature branches?
>> >> >>
>> >> >> So develop should be the next release. Until a specific point, we
>> need a
>> >> >> relase branch like release/nb9 maybe for Alpha/beta and or rc state.
>> So
>> >> we
>> >> >> have a fixed state where we can fix bugs and stuff but no new
>> features.
>> >> New
>> >> >> features until beta or rc, should be done in feature branches and
>> merged
>> >> >> into develop, where this is NB9.1 or whatever.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Than there will be no discussion about whether we can handle or we
>> have
>> >> >> time for „luxury“ stuff or not. Each PR, which is not a bug fix and
>> >> >> important for the next release, is done inside the dev state when we
>> >> have a
>> >> >> release branch.
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Cheers
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Chris
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Von: Neil C Smith
>> >> >> Gesendet: Freitag, 12. Januar 2018 10:02
>> >> >> An: [email protected]
>> >> >> Betreff: Re: Pull requests need to be reviewed
>> >> >>
>> >> >> On Fri, 12 Jan 2018 at 08:04 Geertjan Wielenga <
>> >> >> [email protected]> wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >>> I think we need to set up guidelines — e.g., a PR must be connected
>> to
>> >> an
>> >> >>> issue; a PR must solve a problem and not be cosmetic only; etc.
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> I’d advise looking at pull/3 by Chris instead.
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> I like Chris' PR, and see the benefit of it ... but, within those
>> >> >> guidelines are we going to have the concept of feature freeze?  In my
>> >> >> opinion, if we're in beta vote phase, we should also only be
>> accepting
>> >> bug
>> >> >> fixes.  In which case, I'd be tempted to push that back to the next
>> >> point
>> >> >> release?
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Out of interest, what were the old NetBeans policies around feature
>> >> >> freezing / release planning?
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Best wishes,
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Neil
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> --
>> >> >> Neil C Smith
>> >> >> Artist & Technologist
>> >> >> www.neilcsmith.net
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Praxis LIVE - hybrid visual IDE for creative coding -
>> >> www.praxislive.org
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
>> >> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
>> >>
>> >> For further information about the NetBeans mailing lists, visit:
>> >> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/NETBEANS/Mailing+lists
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
>> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
>>
>> For further information about the NetBeans mailing lists, visit:
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/NETBEANS/Mailing+lists
>>
>>
>>
>>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]

For further information about the NetBeans mailing lists, visit:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/NETBEANS/Mailing+lists



Reply via email to