Re: [HACKYSTAT-DEV-L] Ant Build Sensor ignore checkstyle errors

[Philip Johnson]

I like option (2), although wouldn't it be a bit better to have the user indicate the 
list of error types to include (rather than exclude)?

I also like option (3), i.e. allowing the reduction function to specify the list of error 
types to process.

Cheers,
Philip

--On Friday, October 07, 2005 11:57 AM -1000 Aaron Akihisa Kagawa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:

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
>>
>>
>>