While people can use any tool they want, we kind of decided on using Checkstyle on a project level. A lot of the Jakarta projects are using it and it was felt (ok, it was me) that we could leverage the knowledge and decisions these other groups made regarding the Checkstyle settings. (Really, Oliver did not twist our collective arm. :-) That and the move to use Jalopy around the same time.
- Is there something that PMD is providing that Checkstyle is not? Is it reporting problems that Checkstyle is not? - We should review the Checkstyle settings to see if we want to disable new "features". Sounds like Yoav has a list of candidates. If there are other settings we should be considering, let's discuss it. I'd also like to keep the settings somewhat in-sync between the core and sandbox cvs. I would want to understand the changes being put into the cvs based on PMD complaints. As Yoav says, it could have unintentional effects on the code base. The Checkstyle settings we have disabled/modified to date have been fairly minor. -Mark > -----Original Message----- > From: Shapira, Yoav [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2003 5:54 AM > To: Log4J Developers List > Subject: RE: PMD > > > > Howdy, > PMD is a good tool. There's a large, and increasing, overlap > between it and Checkstyle. Both of them IMHO can be > misleading and shouldn't be trusted blindly. For example, > both (Checkstyle only in its latest version) will complain > about non-final parameters to methods, method "not designed > for extension," etc. For an open-source framework designed > to be extensible like log4j, these are non issues and the > checks should be turned off in PMD/Checkstyle. We should > agree to a common Checkstyle/PMD checklist (unfortunately > they have different formats) before making large sweeping > changes based on PMD/Checkstyle output. > > (Of course this doesn't apply to trivial things like missing > javadoc comments) > > Yoav Shapira > Millennium ChemInformatics > > > >-----Original Message----- > >From: Berin Loritsch [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2003 5:25 PM > >To: Log4J Developers List > >Subject: Re: PMD > > > >Ceki Gülcü wrote: > > > >> At 02:15 PM 6/25/2003 -0700, you wrote: > >> > >>> Sorry, http://pmd.sourceforge.net/ > >> > >> > >> LOL. I thought PMD was an acronym and "Packet Mode Data", "Physical > >> Medium Dependent", "Polarization Mode Dispersion" sounded > out of place. > > > > > >:D My favorite backronym is "Protein Mutant Database" from > their own > > page (http://pmd.sourceforge.net/meaning.html). > > > >-- > > > >"They that give up essential liberty to obtain a little > temporary safety > > deserve neither liberty nor safety." > > - Benjamin Franklin > > > > > >--------------------------------------------------------------------- > >To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > This e-mail, including any attachments, is a confidential > business communication, and may contain information that is > confidential, proprietary and/or privileged. This e-mail is > intended only for the individual(s) to whom it is addressed, > and may not be saved, copied, printed, disclosed or used by > anyone else. If you are not the(an) intended recipient, > please immediately delete this e-mail from your computer > system and notify the sender. Thank you. > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
