What you find cluttering, I regards as helpful to:

   - fellow contributors
   - our (potential) adopters
   - anyone else working on an OFBiz implementation


Met vriendelijke groet,

Pierre Smits
*Proud* *contributor* (but without privileges)* of* Apache OFBiz
<https://ofbiz.apache.org/>, since 2008

*Apache Trafodion <https://trafodion.apache.org>, Vice President*
*Apache Directory <https://directory.apache.org>, PMC Member*
Apache Incubator <https://incubator.apache.org>, committer
Apache Steve <https://steve.apache.org>, committer


On Wed, Feb 19, 2020 at 3:54 PM Michael Brohl <[email protected]>
wrote:

> No, I did not say or mean anything like that. Not sure where you get
> that from.
>
> Please read again, thanks,
>
> Michael
>
> Am 19.02.20 um 15:51 schrieb Pierre Smits:
> > Michael,
> >
> > You mean like:
> >
> >     - *stop* posting comments to tickets to help fellow contributors and
> the
> >     adopters of our product looking to these contributions to help them
> decide
> >     whether or not to invest in an adoption/implementation of (or
> looking for
> >     guidance on issues they experience with their implementation of) the
> >     product?
> >     - *stop* posting to mail threads to provide insight and such,?
> >     - *stop* providing reactions to comments posted to pages in our wiki?
> >     - *stop* taking the initiative?
> >
> > Met vriendelijke groet,
> >
> > Pierre Smits
> > *Proud* *contributor* (but unfortunately without privileges)* of* Apache
> > OFBiz <https://ofbiz.apache.org/>, since 2008
> >
> > *Apache Trafodion <https://trafodion.apache.org>, Vice President*
> > *Apache Directory <https://directory.apache.org>, PMC Member*
> > Apache Incubator <https://incubator.apache.org>, committer
> > Apache Steve <https://steve.apache.org>, committer
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Feb 19, 2020 at 3:05 PM Michael Brohl <[email protected]>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> +1 Gil
> >>
> >> Pierre, can you please stop cluttering the issues with the copy/pasted
> >> yetus artifacts from your local environment?
> >>
> >> At least until we decided to use it and have a setup on the official
> >> infrastructure.
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >>
> >> Michael
> >>
> >>
> >> Am 14.02.20 um 16:34 schrieb Gil Portenseigne:
> >>> Hello Pierre,
> >>>
> >>> It is interesting but i guess that will be the next step.
> >>>
> >>> Thanks
> >>>
> >>> On Fri, Feb 14, 2020 at 09:04:49AM +0100, Pierre Smits wrote:
> >>>> It seems many projects (including those Apache projects in the Hadoop
> >>>> sphere) use the works of the Apache Yetus (see [1]) project to do
> >>>> pre-commit checks (including IIUC checkstyle, in an automate way) on
> >> patch
> >>>> files attached to JIRA tickets and Pull Requests in Github against the
> >>>> latest commit in the branch. This may be helpful to lessen the burden
> on
> >>>> the contributor. When configured correctly, the test results appear in
> >> the
> >>>> ticket. Apache HBASE is such a project using Yetus, See as an example
> >> [2]
> >>>> where test results are included through comments of 'Hadoop QA'.
> >>>>
> >>>> Maybe we should consider this for our project?
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> [1] https://yetus.apache.org
> >>>> [2]
> >>>>
> >>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-14498?jql=project%20%3D%20HBASE%20AND%20status%20%3D%20%22Patch%20Available%22%20AND%20resolution%20%3D%20Unresolved%20ORDER%20BY%20priority%20DESC%2C%20updated%20DESC
> >>>> Best regards,
> >>>>
> >>>> Pierre Smits
> >>>> *Proud* *contributor* (but without privileges)* of* Apache OFBiz
> >>>> <https://ofbiz.apache.org/>, since 2008
> >>>>
> >>>> *Apache Trafodion <https://trafodion.apache.org>, Vice President*
> >>>> *Apache Directory <https://directory.apache.org>, PMC Member*
> >>>> Apache Incubator <https://incubator.apache.org>, committer
> >>>> Apache Steve <https://steve.apache.org>, committer
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> On Thu, Feb 13, 2020 at 9:13 PM Gil Portenseigne <
> >>>> [email protected]> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> Hello Michael,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Adapting checkstyle configuration is less impacting to our codebase
> but
> >>>>> make us stay different from the java standard.
> >>>>> That is the easier path, that will not affect code history.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> But about getting nearer from the java standard is IMO a nice to
> have,
> >> to
> >>>>> make pure java developer feel better discovering OFBiz.
> >>>>> I'm kinda prefer the "opposite approach", but we need to discuss if
> >> this
> >>>>> improvement is worth the history lost.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> In the example you chose, i see no issue capitalizing module,
> >>>>> resource and other. Updating the rule offer the ability to write a
> >>>>> constant like : MoDuLe  :-).
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Lots of errors are about line that are 120+ length, missing or
> uneeded
> >>>>> space etc.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> So that will lead to loads of unrisky modifications. With the usage
> of
> >>>>> IDE with checkstyle plugin this can be done nicely.
> >>>>> I check that over the near thousand of java file concerned more than
> >> 80%
> >>>>> have less than 50 issue... So we can focus our effort onto the big
> >> files
> >>>>> using a branch to test the idea and ease the issue.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> And like Daniel said, it is a good subject for a community week
> effort.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I'd really like to be able to efficiently use this feature, in one
> way
> >>>>> or the other, so thank you for starting this discussion.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Regards,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Gil
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Thu, Feb 13, 2020 at 05:44:40PM +0100, Michael Brohl wrote:
> >>>>>> Hi *,
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> checkstyle currently reports a huge amount of errors. We currently
> >> have
> >>>>> an
> >>>>>> error count setup in the configuration to prevent the build from
> >> failing
> >>>>>> because of the present errors.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Some thoughts/questions to the community:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> * should we take an approach to fine-tune the  configuration so that
> >> it
> >>>>>> better fits the project style?
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> As an example, constants are currently not allowed to be named
> >> "module",
> >>>>>> "resource" etc. which is a common pattern in our code. Changing from
> >>>>>> ^[A-Z][A-Z0-9]*(_[A-Z0-9]+)*$ to
> >> ^[a-zA-Z][a-zA-Z0-9]*(_[a-zA-Z0-9]+)*$
> >>>>>> would allow the common naming.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> The opposite approach would be to rename those to fit the default
> >>>>> settings.
> >>>>>> * should we start an initiative to remove the valid errors like we
> did
> >>>>> with
> >>>>>> the FindBugs initiative some time ago?
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Thanks for your feedback,
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Michael Brohl
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> ecomify GmbH - www.ecomify.de
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>
>
>

Reply via email to