I personally like option (2) as a long term solution. 

Reasons why;
(1) what happens if someone types "ant compile checkstyle" ?

(2) this seems more configurable.

(3) I'm not sure we should require users to have to hack analyses to
configure the sensors functionalities. 

----- Original Message -----
From: "(Cedric) Qin ZHANG" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Friday, October 7, 2005 11:33 am
Subject: Re: [HACKYSTAT-DEV-L] Ant Build Sensor ignore checkstyle errors

> Hi, Aaron,
> 
> I can see several ways to address your problem:
> 
> (1) Check task order in build.xml, so that the order looks like:
>    (a) checkstyle
>    (b) install build sensor
>    (c) compile
>    (d) junit
> 
> (2) Change build sensor, so that there is a property that it 
> ignores 
> checkstyle error, or some other types of error.
> 
> (3) Change analysis to ignore checkstyle error on the server side.
> 
> What people think is the best option?
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Cedric
> 
> 
> 
> Aaron Akihisa Kagawa wrote:
> > I suppose you are right, Ant doesn't fail. But, the thing is that
> > according to the Hackystat Build data there was a failure. So, 
> if I run
> > a Hackystat analysis on build data, the analysis will show a 
> failure. 
> > 
> > In my development process, I would like to have a Hackystat Build
> > failure only for Compilation and JUnit and exclude Checkstyle. 
> In fact,
> > I guess it would be best to leave out Checkstyle totally from 
> the Ant
> > Build Sensor. 
> > 
> > thanks, aaron
> > 
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: Hongbing Kou <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Date: Friday, October 7, 2005 10:59 am
> > Subject: Re: [HACKYSTAT-DEV-L] Ant Build Sensor ignore 
> checkstyle errors
> > 
> >>Hi, Aaron,
> >>
> >>Please correct me if I get it wrong. I think both Checkstyle and 
> >>JUnit failure
> >>will not fail the build. The build will continue and it will 
> >>report 
> >>checkstyle errors and
> >>test failures at the end.
> >>
> >>Thanks,
> >>Hongbing
> >>
> >>At 10:45 AM 10/7/2005, Aaron Akihisa Kagawa wrote:
> >>
> >>>Cedric,
> >>>
> >>>Is there an easy way to ignore a type of error in the Ant Build 
> >>
> >>Sesnor?>For example, you seem to check three things Compilation, 
> >>JUnit, and
> >>
> >>>Checkstyle but I want to ignore Checkstyle errors. My reason 
> for 
> >>
> >>that is
> >>
> >>>that we don't fail builds on checkstyle errors, but we do fail 
> >>
> >>builds on
> >>
> >>>the other two.
> >>>
> >>>In addition, if we wanted to add checks to the build sensor, 
> say an
> >>>automated code inspector we would have to hack the
> >>>BuildSensorAntListener class. In the future it would be cool if 
> >>
> >>it was a
> >>
> >>>little more configurable. It seems like the Ant Build Sensor 
> >>
> >>consists of
> >>
> >>>a collection of ant task "sensors". In fact, when I write the 
> >>
> >>checkstyle>sensor we would have sensors for Junit and 
> Checkstyle, 
> >>which makes me
> >>
> >>>think that we don't need build entry for every Junit and/or 
> >>
> >>Checkstyle>Failure. Instead the Snapshot UnitTest, Checkstyle 
> (we 
> >>need a better
> >>
> >>>more general name for Checkstyle), and Build data could be 
> >>
> >>connected by
> >>
> >>>timestamp or something like that.
> >>>
> >>>thanks, aaron
> >>
> >>
> >>
> 

Reply via email to