Okay, given the priorities and work we have at the moment, I suggest we keep semicolons and use it as the standard unless someone volunteers to make a full switch. WDYT?
On Tue, Sep 13, 2016 at 3:52 PM, Jacopo Cappellato < jacopo.cappell...@hotwaxsystems.com> wrote: > I agree with Rishi's remarks: also, if we follow this approach then > functional changes will be buried in a bunch of non-functional changes. > This could work if the two are committed into two separate commits. > > Jacopo > > On Tue, Sep 13, 2016 at 2:45 PM, Rishi Solanki <rishisolan...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > Fix as you edit, this is something like we are working on X functionality > > and to achieve that functionality if we want to edit an groovy file, then > > we will also remove/add semicolon to it. > > > > If I'm understanding it correctly, then -1 for it. As we have to ask > > explicitly to every contributor/committer to follow this practice on each > > commit/ticket. > > > > I'm up for #1 or #2 to actively remove/add semicolon. That is do it in > one > > shot, not immediately but whenever we are ready to do it, otherwise with > > time we will have more inconsistency in groovy files on this parameter as > > semicolon. > > > > I'm not saying we must do it in one shot, but if community decides to > > proceed with any approach to actively add/remove semicolon then we (@HW) > > can try to assign single dev as volunteer to provide patch for all the > > files. > > > > Thanks! > > > > Best Regards, > > -- > > > > Rishi Solanki > > Manager, Enterprise Software Development > > HotWax Systems Pvt. Ltd. > > Direct: +91-9893287847 > > http://www.hotwaxsystems.com > > > > On Tue, Sep 13, 2016 at 3:49 PM, Taher Alkhateeb < > > slidingfilame...@gmail.com > > > wrote: > > > > > Yup +1 for option 3, fix as you edit > > > > > > On Sep 13, 2016 1:16 PM, "Jacques Le Roux" < > jacques.le.r...@les7arts.com > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > Le 13/09/2016 à 11:56, Michael Brohl a écrit : > > > > > > > >> Same here. I'm not even sure if we really have clean groovy in the > > > >> project, I assume it is mixed up with Java code in some areas. > > > >> > > > >> But I agree to have a consistent style and we should use the Groovy > > > >> language as it shoul be used (even if I would have get used to it > and > > > like > > > >> a a defined code line ending better). > > > >> > > > >> I see the following directions: > > > >> > > > >> 1. actively migrate to pure groovy and remove the semicolons (where > > > >> applicable, it seems there are some cases where you need them, see > > > >> https://dzone.com/articles/groovy-sometimes-you-still) > > > >> > > > >> 2. activeley put semicolons everywhere for consistency > > > >> > > > >> 3. do 1., but only when a groovy file is edited anyway. This would > > > slowly > > > >> migrate groovy files. > > > >> > > > >> I'd be in favor for 3., as long as there are other more important > > things > > > >> to do or there is a volunteer to do it. > > > >> > > > > > > > > This is what I somehow suggested, thanks for clarifying Michael! > Better > > > to > > > > have consistent lines (with respect to semicolons) by file indeed. > > > > > > > > Jacques > > > > > > > > > > > >> Am 13.09.16 um 08:49 schrieb Taher Alkhateeb: > > > >> > > > >>> Okay I missed the historical context. > > > >>> > > > >>> Like Jacopo I also do not have a strong opinion, if it is easier > and > > > >>> faster > > > >>> to keep them, then keep them. The important thing is to take a > > > direction > > > >>> and stay with it. > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >
