Joe, I don't have anything big I am working on presently, except NIFI-463 that is done and waiting to be merged. No need to hold on NIFI-271 on my behalf.
Dan Bress Software Engineer ONYX Consulting Services ________________________________________ From: Joe Witt <[email protected]> Sent: Monday, March 30, 2015 9:06 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: lack of consistent formatting - how do others clean this up? Hello All, Wanted to ping and find out how close we are to being able to do the great reformat? I had the incorrect branch for folks to review if they wanted to mess with the checkstyle rules. It should have been NIFI-271. We're holding for NIFI-250. Just pinging because the longer we wait the more disruptive it is to PRs that folks are working. I know Dan B and Toivo are both working larger efforts so don't want to create too much pain for them when merging. Thanks Joe On Sat, Mar 21, 2015 at 1:55 PM, Tony Kurc <[email protected]> wrote: > Joe, > I like your proposal. > > On Sat, Mar 21, 2015 at 11:18 AM, Joe Witt <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Folks, >> >> Benson put in a ticket a while back: >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NIFI-271 to make a DRY >> nifi-parent we can extend from in the main nifi line and the >> nifi-nar-plugin. >> >> Proposal: >> 1) Do what Benson said. >> 2) In that nifi-parent ensure checkstyle is always run and thus >> consistent across any nifi item. Fail the build if any violations. >> 3) In that nifi-parent ensure check-licenses is always run and if any >> fails - fail the build. >> >> Commentary: >> - This is not as forgiving as Sean suggested but it also does not >> preclude us from doing the QC bot to check higher order items. >> - This is more in-line with Adam's suggestion but gives the >> contributor direct feedback on what is wrong that they can resolve on >> their own without us rejecting their PR. This I am guessing was >> Adam's real intent anyway. >> - I will go through an make sure all existing code is in-line with the >> checkstyle form that we will create. That will require very loud >> music and good drinks but whatever - about as much fun as it was >> getting all the licensing squared away. >> >> I noticed that accumulo has this nicely integrated into their build so >> that gives a great example to follow. >> >> Thanks >> Joe >> >> On Tue, Mar 17, 2015 at 10:44 PM, Joe Witt <[email protected]> wrote: >> > Sean: >> > >> > Nope we're still pretty basic. >> > >> > Thanks >> > Joe >> > >> > On Tue, Mar 17, 2015 at 10:41 PM, Sean Busbey <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> On Tue, Mar 17, 2015 at 9:32 PM, Joe Witt <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> On the thread itself: Anyone interested in pushing forward the >> >>> model/changes to get the formatting process smoothed out please do so. >> >>> >> >>> >> >> Do y'all have a QA bot yet? I'm looking to coalesce the pre-commit >> testing >> >> of Hadoop and HBase in the next ~2-4 weeks. Having a third unrelated >> >> project to throw against that would help me ensure I have something >> >> reusable that can spread across ASF projects. >> >> >> >> We haven't determined yet where the shared pre-commit checker will live, >> >> but we don't seem too opinionated yet so it's unlikely we'll need lots >> of >> >> changes. >> >> >> >> -- >> >> Sean >>
