What about once a week at a defined time?

Ryan Ackley wrote:

>+1 I don't the see the problem with a one time code reformatting on
>check-in.
>
>Glen raises a great point about conflicts with a cron job. So I would
>definitely be opposed to that.
>
>Ryan
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Glen Stampoultzis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: "POI Developers List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Sent: Saturday, May 11, 2002 8:15 PM
>Subject: Re: [VOTE] http://jrefactory.sourceforge.net/cspretty.html
>
>
>  
>
>>-0, I think might cause merge conflicts.  For example in the following
>>sequence:
>>
>>1. checking some code
>>2. cron job reformats.
>>3. continue working on code without updating then commit changes.
>>bzzzt conflicts.
>>
>>so +1 for once off, -0 for frequent cron job.  maybe and infrequent (2
>>weekly) cron job would be okay.
>>
>>-- Glen
>>
>>
>>----- Original Message -----
>>From: "Nicola Ken Barozzi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>To: "POI Developers List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>Sent: Saturday, May 11, 2002 8:34 PM
>>Subject: Re: [VOTE] http://jrefactory.sourceforge.net/cspretty.html
>>
>>
>>    
>>
>>>From: "Andrew C. Oliver" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>>>Please vote now or forever hold your peace.  I'm consulting first
>>>>because after you see the big megacommit it will be too late.
>>>>
>>>>I'd like to install an automatic source formatter into the cron job
>>>>        
>>>>
>that
>  
>
>>>>does our nightly builds.
>>>>
>>>>I've picked this one http://jrefactory.sourceforge.net/cspretty.html
>>>>because it doesn't crash while processing any of our code (unlike
>>>>        
>>>>
>jalopy
>  
>
>>>>which was just a big pain) and after running it 3 times on our code,
>>>>        
>>>>
>it
>  
>
>>>>no longer results in different results (jalopy kept adding //End of
>>>>class to the end of every file EVERY TIME).
>>>>
>>>>I would be happy to work with Ken to get this into Centipede so that
>>>>        
>>>>
>you
>  
>
>>>>could format the code to your preferences when you work on it locally.
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1=+1000  :-D
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>>>I'll merely format it using the defaults that came with jrefactory
>>>>        
>>>>
>minus
>  
>
>>>>some unarguable changes (running on unix so wanted LF not CRLF, and
>>>>        
>>>>
>one
>  
>
>>>>of the options ...don't remember... I changed to make everything work
>>>>right and always diff the same).. . Whining about which format
>>>>        
>>>>
>settings
>  
>
>>>>or some minute detail of the format or even beginning a stupid
>>>>unconcludable discussion (READ: if you don't like it reformat it
>>>>        
>>>>
>locally
>  
>
>>>>via the aforementioned build task once we get it implemented...this is
>>>>tooooo pedantic to argue about) hereby changes my vote to -1 on this.
>>>>
>>>>I hereby vote +1 -- consistent formatting could be nice.
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>I'm +0 for it.
>>>
>>>But before implementing it, what about a code formatter that kiks in
>>>      
>>>
>>*only*
>>    
>>
>>>if a committed file has a number of checkstyle errors (for our
>>>      
>>>
>standards)
>  
>
>>>an certain threshold?
>>>
>>>Sometimes it's nice to give a certain indention that automatic tools
>>>      
>>>
>don't
>  
>
>>>do, and if the file is consistent with our standards, it's not needed to
>>>have it reformatted.
>>>
>>>So, I'm +1 (that means I will help) for running this tool on files that
>>>don't pass the checkstyle check to a certain threshold.
>>>
>>>Oh, and be careful that CSPretty can be made to add javadocs
>>>      
>>>
>>automatically.
>>    
>>
>>>This needs to be avoided because checkstyle won't complain but the
>>>      
>>>
>>javadocs
>>    
>>
>>>would still be useless.
>>>
>>>What do you think?
>>>
>>>--
>>>Nicola Ken Barozzi                   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>            - verba volant, scripta manent -
>>>   (discussions get forgotten, just code remains)
>>>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>>
>>>--
>>>To unsubscribe, e-mail:
>>>      
>>>
><mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>  
>
>>>For additional commands, e-mail:
>>>      
>>>
><mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>  
>
>>>      
>>>
>>
>>--
>>To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>
>>    
>>
>
>
>--
>To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>
>  
>




--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Reply via email to