On Tue, Aug 17, 2010 at 7:51 AM, Eric Douglas <edoug...@blockhouse.com>wrote:
> I figured out how to use the ant tool to build the jars and it seems > fairly simple. I downloaded one project which was using maven and it seemed > fairly ugly. I installed the Eclipse maven plugin and haven't figured out > how to compile it. Jeremias also recently said he doesn't like maven. > Maven has to be the single most effective producer of quasi-religion arguments in the entire ASF universe. Since I don't have time to offer up a Maven build alternative for fop, I have no business bugging you all, and I apologize for raising the point. However, would you like Sonar? I don't think that it requires a maven build (but I might be wrong). > > ------------------------------ > *From:* Benson Margulies [mailto:bimargul...@gmail.com] > *Sent:* Monday, August 16, 2010 5:29 PM > *To:* fop-dev@xmlgraphics.apache.org > *Subject:* Re: findbugs results > > Simon, > > The people who make Sonar host Apache projects for free. Many Apache > projects have Sonar set up there, and can get findbugs and all sorts of > other useful data without individual contributors running these tools. > > Having written that ... > > for what it's worth, I am personally opposed to taking the default output > of 'findbugs' as gospel. Many of the things that it reports are 'bugs' only > in the eyes of its authors or the religious. > > On other projects I've worked on, the project has come up with an agreeable > set of checkstyle and/or PMD rules that are treated as 'normative', but > findbugs output is hard to treat as anything except a report that you can > read and consider whether any particular item deserves to be addressed. > Aiming for a perfect score there seems unrealistic. > > Meanwhile, I am, completely off to one side, curious as to why you think > that maven is a 'big' solution. Sheer disk space of the downloaded > components? Something else? I build CXF on a rather wimpy MacMini at home > from time to time. It is thirsty for permgen space when you use certain > plugins, but plain old compiling has never struck me as that different from > ant. > > --benson > > > On Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 9:34 AM, Simon Pepping <spepp...@leverkruid.eu>wrote: > >> Glenn, >> >> Thanks for this interesting report. >> >> I noted that the problems reported here are harder to fix. They often >> touch upon design issues. See my efforts on the warnings for clone, >> https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49754. Probably, >> when a codebase has no findbugs problems, it has a clean OO design. >> But for a code base with a long history and many authors, that is >> hardly feasible. Moreover, where would we find the time and budget to >> do all this work? >> >> I also noted that findbugs is too big for my simple machine. I do not >> develop FOP as a profession, so I do not have a larger machine for >> this purpose alone. There goes findbugs into the same corner as maven: >> for professionals only. >> >> Simon >> >> On Sun, Aug 15, 2010 at 04:40:47AM +0800, Glenn Adams wrote: >> > First, I wish to express my pleasure that checkstyle (5.1 at least) now >> > reports zero warnings/errors, and that only four deprecation warnings >> are >> > present at compile time. This is a significant improvement in code >> > cleanliness, and I hope that all committers will take the time to run >> > checkstyle and resolve new warnings before performing new commits. >> > >> > However, as I mentioned in a previous messge, there remain a fairly >> large >> > number of warnings/errors reported by findbugs: 922 of them to be exact. >> I >> > don't plan to take any action myself on these at the present time, since >> > I've managed to stir up the pot (and emotions) quite adequately with my >> > prior patch. However, if others wish to start addressing these issues, >> > perhaps incrementally over time, then we can move the code base even >> closer >> > to a zero warning state, or at least a state where we've audited all the >> > warnings adequately. To this end, I am attaching the current findbugs >> report >> > as a matter of interest. Because findbugs reports more potentially >> serious >> > semantic problems in the code, it is also likely that more potential >> real >> > bugs will be uncovered and addressed. >> >> -- >> Simon Pepping >> home page: http://www.leverkruid.eu >> > >
