Re: Review of used reports for Maven project sites.
Almost all our components use custom report list to build site. And also becouse we skip tests for release build - our subpage for reports is empty. Sylwester pon., 4 kwi 2022, 02:32 użytkownik Tibor Digana napisał: > It is a nice report in Jenkins but still this cannot be compared with > Sonar. > Anyway, guys, feel free to continue in this discussion. > T > > On Mon, Apr 4, 2022 at 2:26 AM Olivier Lamy wrote: > > > On Mon, 4 Apr 2022 at 08:51, Tibor Digana > wrote: > > > > > Regarding the next 4 reports out of 5: > > > > > > Test report > > > Checkstyle report > > > PMD report and > > > Taglist report > > > > > > we should use the Sonar Cube as a substitution and the development + > > > release process should take the Sonar into account on the fly. > > > > > > > no need for yet another external tool as we already use Jenkins. > > Jenkins already offers test report, jacoco > > > > > https://ci-maven.apache.org/job/Maven/job/ci-reporting-test/job/maven-compiler-plugin/job/ci-reporting/ > > > > And now even some static analysis data collection of data produced by > Maven > > plugins as prototyped here > > > > > https://ci-maven.apache.org/job/Maven/job/ci-reporting-test/job/maven-compiler-plugin/job/ci-reporting/2/linux-jdk11/ > > > > > > > Then I would understand the purpose of removal. > > > But now I don't! > > > > > > T > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Sun, Apr 3, 2022 at 10:46 PM Slawomir Jaranowski < > > > s.jaranow...@gmail.com> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > We have plans for the next release for parents poms. > > > > > > > > Maybe I will be boring, but I still do not see any values for some of > > the > > > > reports for static documentation sites of components. > > > > > > > > Result of tests during release time has no value after some time. > > > Important > > > > is the current result of tests on CI systems. > > > > > > > > Maybe someone will show me the value of it ... so I will stop asking. > > > > > > > > So proposition to remove: > > > > > > > > - surefire [1] > > > > - checkstyle [2] > > > > - pmd [3] > > > > - taglist [4] > > > > - invoker [5] > > > > > > > > [1] https://github.com/apache/maven-parent/pull/49 > > > > [2] https://github.com/apache/maven-parent/pull/51 > > > > [3] https://github.com/apache/maven-parent/pull/52 > > > > [4] https://github.com/apache/maven-parent/pull/53 > > > > [5] https://github.com/apache/maven-parent/pull/54 > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > Sławomir Jaranowski > > > > > > > > > >
Re: Review of used reports for Maven project sites.
It is a nice report in Jenkins but still this cannot be compared with Sonar. Anyway, guys, feel free to continue in this discussion. T On Mon, Apr 4, 2022 at 2:26 AM Olivier Lamy wrote: > On Mon, 4 Apr 2022 at 08:51, Tibor Digana wrote: > > > Regarding the next 4 reports out of 5: > > > > Test report > > Checkstyle report > > PMD report and > > Taglist report > > > > we should use the Sonar Cube as a substitution and the development + > > release process should take the Sonar into account on the fly. > > > > no need for yet another external tool as we already use Jenkins. > Jenkins already offers test report, jacoco > > https://ci-maven.apache.org/job/Maven/job/ci-reporting-test/job/maven-compiler-plugin/job/ci-reporting/ > > And now even some static analysis data collection of data produced by Maven > plugins as prototyped here > > https://ci-maven.apache.org/job/Maven/job/ci-reporting-test/job/maven-compiler-plugin/job/ci-reporting/2/linux-jdk11/ > > > > Then I would understand the purpose of removal. > > But now I don't! > > > > T > > > > > > > > > > On Sun, Apr 3, 2022 at 10:46 PM Slawomir Jaranowski < > > s.jaranow...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > We have plans for the next release for parents poms. > > > > > > Maybe I will be boring, but I still do not see any values for some of > the > > > reports for static documentation sites of components. > > > > > > Result of tests during release time has no value after some time. > > Important > > > is the current result of tests on CI systems. > > > > > > Maybe someone will show me the value of it ... so I will stop asking. > > > > > > So proposition to remove: > > > > > > - surefire [1] > > > - checkstyle [2] > > > - pmd [3] > > > - taglist [4] > > > - invoker [5] > > > > > > [1] https://github.com/apache/maven-parent/pull/49 > > > [2] https://github.com/apache/maven-parent/pull/51 > > > [3] https://github.com/apache/maven-parent/pull/52 > > > [4] https://github.com/apache/maven-parent/pull/53 > > > [5] https://github.com/apache/maven-parent/pull/54 > > > > > > > > > -- > > > Sławomir Jaranowski > > > > > >
Re: Review of used reports for Maven project sites.
On Mon, 4 Apr 2022 at 08:51, Tibor Digana wrote: > Regarding the next 4 reports out of 5: > > Test report > Checkstyle report > PMD report and > Taglist report > > we should use the Sonar Cube as a substitution and the development + > release process should take the Sonar into account on the fly. > no need for yet another external tool as we already use Jenkins. Jenkins already offers test report, jacoco https://ci-maven.apache.org/job/Maven/job/ci-reporting-test/job/maven-compiler-plugin/job/ci-reporting/ And now even some static analysis data collection of data produced by Maven plugins as prototyped here https://ci-maven.apache.org/job/Maven/job/ci-reporting-test/job/maven-compiler-plugin/job/ci-reporting/2/linux-jdk11/ > Then I would understand the purpose of removal. > But now I don't! > > T > > > > > On Sun, Apr 3, 2022 at 10:46 PM Slawomir Jaranowski < > s.jaranow...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > We have plans for the next release for parents poms. > > > > Maybe I will be boring, but I still do not see any values for some of the > > reports for static documentation sites of components. > > > > Result of tests during release time has no value after some time. > Important > > is the current result of tests on CI systems. > > > > Maybe someone will show me the value of it ... so I will stop asking. > > > > So proposition to remove: > > > > - surefire [1] > > - checkstyle [2] > > - pmd [3] > > - taglist [4] > > - invoker [5] > > > > [1] https://github.com/apache/maven-parent/pull/49 > > [2] https://github.com/apache/maven-parent/pull/51 > > [3] https://github.com/apache/maven-parent/pull/52 > > [4] https://github.com/apache/maven-parent/pull/53 > > [5] https://github.com/apache/maven-parent/pull/54 > > > > > > -- > > Sławomir Jaranowski > > >
Re: Review of used reports for Maven project sites.
Regarding the next 4 reports out of 5: Test report Checkstyle report PMD report and Taglist report we should use the Sonar Cube as a substitution and the development + release process should take the Sonar into account on the fly. Then I would understand the purpose of removal. But now I don't! T On Sun, Apr 3, 2022 at 10:46 PM Slawomir Jaranowski wrote: > Hi, > > We have plans for the next release for parents poms. > > Maybe I will be boring, but I still do not see any values for some of the > reports for static documentation sites of components. > > Result of tests during release time has no value after some time. Important > is the current result of tests on CI systems. > > Maybe someone will show me the value of it ... so I will stop asking. > > So proposition to remove: > > - surefire [1] > - checkstyle [2] > - pmd [3] > - taglist [4] > - invoker [5] > > [1] https://github.com/apache/maven-parent/pull/49 > [2] https://github.com/apache/maven-parent/pull/51 > [3] https://github.com/apache/maven-parent/pull/52 > [4] https://github.com/apache/maven-parent/pull/53 > [5] https://github.com/apache/maven-parent/pull/54 > > > -- > Sławomir Jaranowski >
Re: Review of used reports for Maven project sites.
hm, I do not understand his change regarding PR #49. The CI result is used to fail due to the Socket timeout. The same has happened in the latest surefire result vote. The build was red, we tried to restart the build for 3 days, and finally the build got green at the end of the Vote. Instead of removing the surefire report, we should adjust the process and the template should be changed and a new entry (CI URL) should be added along with Site link, SHA512, etc. If one report is going to be removed, there should be some substitution but mandatory substitution done prior. This would improve the process while you prepare the release on your own, but this should not be all. PR #49 seems to be incomplete. On Sun, Apr 3, 2022 at 10:46 PM Slawomir Jaranowski wrote: > Hi, > > We have plans for the next release for parents poms. > > Maybe I will be boring, but I still do not see any values for some of the > reports for static documentation sites of components. > > Result of tests during release time has no value after some time. Important > is the current result of tests on CI systems. > > Maybe someone will show me the value of it ... so I will stop asking. > > So proposition to remove: > > - surefire [1] > - checkstyle [2] > - pmd [3] > - taglist [4] > - invoker [5] > > [1] https://github.com/apache/maven-parent/pull/49 > [2] https://github.com/apache/maven-parent/pull/51 > [3] https://github.com/apache/maven-parent/pull/52 > [4] https://github.com/apache/maven-parent/pull/53 > [5] https://github.com/apache/maven-parent/pull/54 > > > -- > Sławomir Jaranowski >
Re: Review of used reports for Maven project sites.
On Mon, 4 Apr 2022 at 06:46, Slawomir Jaranowski wrote: > Hi, > > We have plans for the next release for parents poms. > > Maybe I will be boring, but I still do not see any values for some of the > reports for static documentation sites of components. > > Result of tests during release time has no value after some time. Important > is the current result of tests on CI systems. > > Maybe someone will show me the value of it ... so I will stop asking. > > So proposition to remove: > > - surefire [1] > +1 as build fail if issues and of we want the list on test just go to Jenkins > - checkstyle [2] > +1 already enforced by a build failure in case of violations so it's just an empty report > - pmd [3] > 0 perso I do not read, Someone does? If yes, why do we not solve the reported problems? :) > - taglist [4] > 0 same as PMD > - invoker [5] > +1 same as surefire I tend to prefer having such reporting live in the CI system such this https://ci-maven.apache.org/job/Maven/job/ci-reporting-test/job/maven-compiler-plugin/job/ci-reporting/2/linux-jdk11/ And I don't see the added values of having those reports part of any site for a release made 6 months or 1 yo or even more. > > [1] https://github.com/apache/maven-parent/pull/49 > [2] https://github.com/apache/maven-parent/pull/51 > [3] https://github.com/apache/maven-parent/pull/52 > [4] https://github.com/apache/maven-parent/pull/53 > [5] https://github.com/apache/maven-parent/pull/54 > > > -- > Sławomir Jaranowski >
Re: Review of used reports for Maven project sites.
-1 I read them sometimes and they don't cost anything please just ignore them if you don't use them On 2022/04/03 20:46:19 Slawomir Jaranowski wrote: > Hi, > > We have plans for the next release for parents poms. > > Maybe I will be boring, but I still do not see any values for some of the > reports for static documentation sites of components. > > Result of tests during release time has no value after -1some time. Important > is the current result of tests on CI systems. > > Maybe someone will show me the value of it ... so I will stop asking. > > So proposition to remove: > > - surefire [1] > - checkstyle [2] > - pmd [3] > - taglist [4] > - invoker [5] > > [1] https://github.com/apache/maven-parent/pull/49 > [2] https://github.com/apache/maven-parent/pull/51 > [3] https://github.com/apache/maven-parent/pull/52 > [4] https://github.com/apache/maven-parent/pull/53 > [5] https://github.com/apache/maven-parent/pull/54 > > > -- > Sławomir Jaranowski > - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
Re: Review of used reports for Maven project sites.
+1 Sylwester niedz., 3 kwi 2022, 22:46 użytkownik Slawomir Jaranowski < s.jaranow...@gmail.com> napisał: > Hi, > > We have plans for the next release for parents poms. > > Maybe I will be boring, but I still do not see any values for some of the > reports for static documentation sites of components. > > Result of tests during release time has no value after some time. Important > is the current result of tests on CI systems. > > Maybe someone will show me the value of it ... so I will stop asking. > > So proposition to remove: > > - surefire [1] > - checkstyle [2] > - pmd [3] > - taglist [4] > - invoker [5] > > [1] https://github.com/apache/maven-parent/pull/49 > [2] https://github.com/apache/maven-parent/pull/51 > [3] https://github.com/apache/maven-parent/pull/52 > [4] https://github.com/apache/maven-parent/pull/53 > [5] https://github.com/apache/maven-parent/pull/54 > > > -- > Sławomir Jaranowski >
Re: Review of used reports for Maven project sites.
; >> > > czw., 24 lut 2022 o 22:49 Tamás Cservenák >> > > napisał(a): >> > > >> > > > Olivier, >> > > > >> > > > please remove all the Jenkins checks from all of the Maven builds >> you >> > > added >> > > > without asking anyone about adding it. >> > > > The release manager should ensure beforehand it is all ok, if not, >> try >> > to >> > > > fix it, if the issue is bigger, still can decide to rollback the >> > change. >> > > > >> > > > Thanks >> > > > T >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > On Thu, Feb 24, 2022 at 10:14 PM Tamás Cservenák < >> ta...@cservenak.net> >> > > > wrote: >> > > > >> > > > > Building javadoc is slow and very fragile (fetches remote >> resources, >> > > > chews >> > > > > on stuff etc). >> > > > > Why not have a savvy release manager ensuring it is building, and >> > > calling >> > > > > out PR authors to fix it? >> > > > > The Worst can happen is rel mgr rollback the chnge if the PR >> author >> > is >> > > > > unresponsive. >> > > > > >> > > > > On Thu, Feb 24, 2022 at 10:01 PM Olivier Lamy >> > > wrote: >> > > > > >> > > > >> Please read what I say. I'm just mentioning javadoc as >> contributors >> > > > >> and committers can fail the build with bad javadoc but we will >> not >> > see >> > > > it. >> > > > >> >> > > > >> On Fri, 25 Feb 2022 at 06:47, Tamás Cservenák < >> ta...@cservenak.net> >> > > > >> wrote: >> > > > >> >> > > > >> > Building everything for each commit is insane. >> > > > >> > >> > > > >> > Also, I find a release mgr that does NOT check is site building >> > > > >> beforehand >> > > > >> > release as sloppy. >> > > > >> > >> > > > >> > Hence, building everything on each commit just to suit sloppy >> > > release >> > > > >> mgrs >> > > > >> > is insane IMHO. >> > > > >> > >> > > > >> > My 5 cents. >> > > > >> > >> > > > >> > T >> > > > >> > >> > > > >> > On Thu, Feb 24, 2022 at 9:30 PM Olivier Lamy > > >> > > > wrote: >> > > > >> > >> > > > >> > > Sounds good. >> > > > >> > > But who has never released something and having javadoc >> failing >> > > in >> > > > >> the >> > > > >> > > middle of the release or the site generation failing once tag >> > done >> > > > and >> > > > >> > > artifacts staged… I find this a pain >> > > > >> > > >> > > > >> > > Maybe only testing javadoc works at least ? >> > > > >> > > >> > > > >> > > Btw I agree some reports could be removed >> > > > >> > > >> > > > >> > > On Fri, 25 Feb 2022 at 6:24 am, >> wrote: >> > > > >> > > >> > > > >> > > > and reporting profile was done for this: >> > > > >> > > > - without reporting profile, just light site generation >> > > > >> > > > - with reporting profile, full documentation site >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > disabling reporting profile for CI should do the job >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > - Mail original - >> > > > >> > > > De: "herve boutemy" >> > > > >> > > > À: "Maven Developers List" >> > > > >> > > > Envoyé: Jeudi 24 Février 2022 21:21:45 >> > > > >> > > > Objet: Re: Review of used reports for Maven project sites. >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > done on GH
Re: Review of used reports for Maven project sites.
ove all the Jenkins checks from all of the Maven builds > you > > > > added > > > > > without asking anyone about adding it. > > > > > The release manager should ensure beforehand it is all ok, if not, > > try > > > to > > > > > fix it, if the issue is bigger, still can decide to rollback the > > > change. > > > > > > > > > > Thanks > > > > > T > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Feb 24, 2022 at 10:14 PM Tamás Cservenák < > > ta...@cservenak.net> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Building javadoc is slow and very fragile (fetches remote > > resources, > > > > > chews > > > > > > on stuff etc). > > > > > > Why not have a savvy release manager ensuring it is building, and > > > > calling > > > > > > out PR authors to fix it? > > > > > > The Worst can happen is rel mgr rollback the chnge if the PR > author > > > is > > > > > > unresponsive. > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Feb 24, 2022 at 10:01 PM Olivier Lamy > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > >> Please read what I say. I'm just mentioning javadoc as > > contributors > > > > > >> and committers can fail the build with bad javadoc but we will > not > > > see > > > > > it. > > > > > >> > > > > > >> On Fri, 25 Feb 2022 at 06:47, Tamás Cservenák < > > ta...@cservenak.net> > > > > > >> wrote: > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > Building everything for each commit is insane. > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > Also, I find a release mgr that does NOT check is site > building > > > > > >> beforehand > > > > > >> > release as sloppy. > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > Hence, building everything on each commit just to suit sloppy > > > > release > > > > > >> mgrs > > > > > >> > is insane IMHO. > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > My 5 cents. > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > T > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > On Thu, Feb 24, 2022 at 9:30 PM Olivier Lamy < > ol...@apache.org> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > Sounds good. > > > > > >> > > But who has never released something and having javadoc > > failing > > > > in > > > > > >> the > > > > > >> > > middle of the release or the site generation failing once > tag > > > done > > > > > and > > > > > >> > > artifacts staged… I find this a pain > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > Maybe only testing javadoc works at least ? > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > Btw I agree some reports could be removed > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > On Fri, 25 Feb 2022 at 6:24 am, > > wrote: > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > and reporting profile was done for this: > > > > > >> > > > - without reporting profile, just light site generation > > > > > >> > > > - with reporting profile, full documentation site > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > disabling reporting profile for CI should do the job > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > - Mail original - > > > > > >> > > > De: "herve boutemy" > > > > > >> > > > À: "Maven Developers List" > > > > > >> > > > Envoyé: Jeudi 24 Février 2022 21:21:45 > > > > > >> > > > Objet: Re: Review of used reports for Maven project sites. > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > done on GH and Jenkins, then on each commit? > > > > > >> > >
Re: Review of used reports for Maven project sites.
t; > > Why not have a savvy release manager ensuring it is building, and > > > calling > > > > > out PR authors to fix it? > > > > > The Worst can happen is rel mgr rollback the chnge if the PR author > > is > > > > > unresponsive. > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Feb 24, 2022 at 10:01 PM Olivier Lamy > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > >> Please read what I say. I'm just mentioning javadoc as > contributors > > > > >> and committers can fail the build with bad javadoc but we will not > > see > > > > it. > > > > >> > > > > >> On Fri, 25 Feb 2022 at 06:47, Tamás Cservenák < > ta...@cservenak.net> > > > > >> wrote: > > > > >> > > > > >> > Building everything for each commit is insane. > > > > >> > > > > > >> > Also, I find a release mgr that does NOT check is site building > > > > >> beforehand > > > > >> > release as sloppy. > > > > >> > > > > > >> > Hence, building everything on each commit just to suit sloppy > > > release > > > > >> mgrs > > > > >> > is insane IMHO. > > > > >> > > > > > >> > My 5 cents. > > > > >> > > > > > >> > T > > > > >> > > > > > >> > On Thu, Feb 24, 2022 at 9:30 PM Olivier Lamy > > > > wrote: > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > Sounds good. > > > > >> > > But who has never released something and having javadoc > failing > > > in > > > > >> the > > > > >> > > middle of the release or the site generation failing once tag > > done > > > > and > > > > >> > > artifacts staged… I find this a pain > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > Maybe only testing javadoc works at least ? > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > Btw I agree some reports could be removed > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > On Fri, 25 Feb 2022 at 6:24 am, > wrote: > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > and reporting profile was done for this: > > > > >> > > > - without reporting profile, just light site generation > > > > >> > > > - with reporting profile, full documentation site > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > disabling reporting profile for CI should do the job > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > - Mail original - > > > > >> > > > De: "herve boutemy" > > > > >> > > > À: "Maven Developers List" > > > > >> > > > Envoyé: Jeudi 24 Février 2022 21:21:45 > > > > >> > > > Objet: Re: Review of used reports for Maven project sites. > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > done on GH and Jenkins, then on each commit? > > > > >> > > > we're heating oceans for nothing > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > IMHO, we need to differentiate CI vs release documentation: > CI > > > > >> should > > > > >> > be > > > > >> > > > much lighter than release > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > - Mail original - > > > > >> > > > De: "Slawomir Jaranowski" > > > > >> > > > À: "Maven Developers List" > > > > >> > > > Envoyé: Jeudi 24 Février 2022 20:53:49 > > > > >> > > > Objet: Re: Review of used reports for Maven project sites. > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > Yes is done after release but also on jenkins for plugins > and > > on > > > > GH > > > > >> > > builds > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > czw., 24 lut 2022 o 20:43 > napisał(a): > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > full site building with reports enabled (through reporting > > > > >> profile) >
Re: Review of used reports for Maven project sites.
Hi, I've created a few PRs for removing some reports from Maven site. [1] I think that such reports do not bring any useful information for project documentations, but have influence to site build time. [1] https://github.com/apache/maven-parent/pulls pt., 25 lut 2022 o 03:11 Olivier Lamy napisał(a): > Hi, > > On Fri, 25 Feb 2022 at 07:57, Slawomir Jaranowski > wrote: > > > Hi > > In next version of Maven parent > > - detectLinks from javadoc configurations was removed, so javadoc will > not > > download remote resource, it was fails many times in this case > > - findbugs was removed - it also took a lot of time > > > > My proposition is to remove from reports: > > - surefire > > - checkstyle > > - pmd > > - taglist > > - invoker > > and finally - jxr > > > > chekstyle is used during build, > > if we want to use pmd should be included in build > > any other tests result are reported on jenkins for each build, I don't > see > > benefit of such in documentations > > > > I tend to agree to remove reports which are already part of the build and > fail the build in case of issues (such checkstyle, surefire, invoker). > Because at the end reports are just empty and finally do not provide much > more interesting information. > What about having those reports in Jenkins (for at least only one > combination). > But which one? Jenkins reporting can support a lot of tools > > https://github.com/jenkinsci/analysis-model/blob/master/SUPPORTED-FORMATS.md > I feel sometimes some reports are generating some false negative warnings, > But at least it will be here if someone wants to have a look but would not > fail a normal build and not make extra noise > Not sure which tools could be interesting? spotbugs, compiler warnings, > what else? > > > > > > > and of course I can change GH action to build site only on one node > > > > agree on that maybe for only 1 combination such linux/jdk 1.8/maven last > version? > > > > > > czw., 24 lut 2022 o 22:49 Tamás Cservenák > > napisał(a): > > > > > Olivier, > > > > > > please remove all the Jenkins checks from all of the Maven builds you > > added > > > without asking anyone about adding it. > > > The release manager should ensure beforehand it is all ok, if not, try > to > > > fix it, if the issue is bigger, still can decide to rollback the > change. > > > > > > Thanks > > > T > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Feb 24, 2022 at 10:14 PM Tamás Cservenák > > > wrote: > > > > > > > Building javadoc is slow and very fragile (fetches remote resources, > > > chews > > > > on stuff etc). > > > > Why not have a savvy release manager ensuring it is building, and > > calling > > > > out PR authors to fix it? > > > > The Worst can happen is rel mgr rollback the chnge if the PR author > is > > > > unresponsive. > > > > > > > > On Thu, Feb 24, 2022 at 10:01 PM Olivier Lamy > > wrote: > > > > > > > >> Please read what I say. I'm just mentioning javadoc as contributors > > > >> and committers can fail the build with bad javadoc but we will not > see > > > it. > > > >> > > > >> On Fri, 25 Feb 2022 at 06:47, Tamás Cservenák > > > >> wrote: > > > >> > > > >> > Building everything for each commit is insane. > > > >> > > > > >> > Also, I find a release mgr that does NOT check is site building > > > >> beforehand > > > >> > release as sloppy. > > > >> > > > > >> > Hence, building everything on each commit just to suit sloppy > > release > > > >> mgrs > > > >> > is insane IMHO. > > > >> > > > > >> > My 5 cents. > > > >> > > > > >> > T > > > >> > > > > >> > On Thu, Feb 24, 2022 at 9:30 PM Olivier Lamy > > > wrote: > > > >> > > > > >> > > Sounds good. > > > >> > > But who has never released something and having javadoc failing > > in > > > >> the > > > >> > > middle of the release or the site generation failing once tag > done > > > and > > > >> > > artifacts staged… I find this a pain > > > >> > > > > > &
Re: Review of used reports for Maven project sites.
Hi, On Fri, 25 Feb 2022 at 07:57, Slawomir Jaranowski wrote: > Hi > In next version of Maven parent > - detectLinks from javadoc configurations was removed, so javadoc will not > download remote resource, it was fails many times in this case > - findbugs was removed - it also took a lot of time > > My proposition is to remove from reports: > - surefire > - checkstyle > - pmd > - taglist > - invoker > and finally - jxr > > chekstyle is used during build, > if we want to use pmd should be included in build > any other tests result are reported on jenkins for each build, I don't see > benefit of such in documentations > I tend to agree to remove reports which are already part of the build and fail the build in case of issues (such checkstyle, surefire, invoker). Because at the end reports are just empty and finally do not provide much more interesting information. What about having those reports in Jenkins (for at least only one combination). But which one? Jenkins reporting can support a lot of tools https://github.com/jenkinsci/analysis-model/blob/master/SUPPORTED-FORMATS.md I feel sometimes some reports are generating some false negative warnings, But at least it will be here if someone wants to have a look but would not fail a normal build and not make extra noise Not sure which tools could be interesting? spotbugs, compiler warnings, what else? > > and of course I can change GH action to build site only on one node > agree on that maybe for only 1 combination such linux/jdk 1.8/maven last version? > > czw., 24 lut 2022 o 22:49 Tamás Cservenák > napisał(a): > > > Olivier, > > > > please remove all the Jenkins checks from all of the Maven builds you > added > > without asking anyone about adding it. > > The release manager should ensure beforehand it is all ok, if not, try to > > fix it, if the issue is bigger, still can decide to rollback the change. > > > > Thanks > > T > > > > > > > > On Thu, Feb 24, 2022 at 10:14 PM Tamás Cservenák > > wrote: > > > > > Building javadoc is slow and very fragile (fetches remote resources, > > chews > > > on stuff etc). > > > Why not have a savvy release manager ensuring it is building, and > calling > > > out PR authors to fix it? > > > The Worst can happen is rel mgr rollback the chnge if the PR author is > > > unresponsive. > > > > > > On Thu, Feb 24, 2022 at 10:01 PM Olivier Lamy > wrote: > > > > > >> Please read what I say. I'm just mentioning javadoc as contributors > > >> and committers can fail the build with bad javadoc but we will not see > > it. > > >> > > >> On Fri, 25 Feb 2022 at 06:47, Tamás Cservenák > > >> wrote: > > >> > > >> > Building everything for each commit is insane. > > >> > > > >> > Also, I find a release mgr that does NOT check is site building > > >> beforehand > > >> > release as sloppy. > > >> > > > >> > Hence, building everything on each commit just to suit sloppy > release > > >> mgrs > > >> > is insane IMHO. > > >> > > > >> > My 5 cents. > > >> > > > >> > T > > >> > > > >> > On Thu, Feb 24, 2022 at 9:30 PM Olivier Lamy > > wrote: > > >> > > > >> > > Sounds good. > > >> > > But who has never released something and having javadoc failing > in > > >> the > > >> > > middle of the release or the site generation failing once tag done > > and > > >> > > artifacts staged… I find this a pain > > >> > > > > >> > > Maybe only testing javadoc works at least ? > > >> > > > > >> > > Btw I agree some reports could be removed > > >> > > > > >> > > On Fri, 25 Feb 2022 at 6:24 am, wrote: > > >> > > > > >> > > > and reporting profile was done for this: > > >> > > > - without reporting profile, just light site generation > > >> > > > - with reporting profile, full documentation site > > >> > > > > > >> > > > disabling reporting profile for CI should do the job > > >> > > > > > >> > > > - Mail original - > > >> > > > De: "herve boutemy" > > >> > > > À: "Maven Developers List" > > >> > > >
Re: Review of used reports for Maven project sites.
g javadoc works at least ? > >> > > > >> > > Btw I agree some reports could be removed > >> > > > >> > > On Fri, 25 Feb 2022 at 6:24 am, wrote: > >> > > > >> > > > and reporting profile was done for this: > >> > > > - without reporting profile, just light site generation > >> > > > - with reporting profile, full documentation site > >> > > > > >> > > > disabling reporting profile for CI should do the job > >> > > > > >> > > > - Mail original - > >> > > > De: "herve boutemy" > >> > > > À: "Maven Developers List" > >> > > > Envoyé: Jeudi 24 Février 2022 21:21:45 > >> > > > Objet: Re: Review of used reports for Maven project sites. > >> > > > > >> > > > done on GH and Jenkins, then on each commit? > >> > > > we're heating oceans for nothing > >> > > > > >> > > > IMHO, we need to differentiate CI vs release documentation: CI > >> should > >> > be > >> > > > much lighter than release > >> > > > > >> > > > - Mail original - > >> > > > De: "Slawomir Jaranowski" > >> > > > À: "Maven Developers List" > >> > > > Envoyé: Jeudi 24 Février 2022 20:53:49 > >> > > > Objet: Re: Review of used reports for Maven project sites. > >> > > > > >> > > > Yes is done after release but also on jenkins for plugins and on > GH > >> > > builds > >> > > > > >> > > > czw., 24 lut 2022 o 20:43 napisał(a): > >> > > > > >> > > > > full site building with reports enabled (through reporting > >> profile) > >> > is > >> > > > > just done after release, isn't it? > >> > > > > > >> > > > > - Mail original - > >> > > > > De: "Slawomir Jaranowski" > >> > > > > À: "Maven Developers List" > >> > > > > Envoyé: Jeudi 24 Février 2022 20:24:56 > >> > > > > Objet: Review of used reports for Maven project sites. > >> > > > > > >> > > > > Hi, > >> > > > > > >> > > > > Building the Maven site takes a long time for our projects. > >> > > > > > >> > > > > Before releasing the next version of maven-parent, I have a > >> proposal > >> > to > >> > > > > review used Maven site reports. > >> > > > > > >> > > > > So > >> > > > > > >> > > > > - without reporting profile, standard > >> > > maven-project-info-reports-plugin > >> > > > - > >> > > > > build very quick - no problems > >> > > > > > >> > > > > - with reporting profile: > >> > > > > - surefire - require test phase - can have influence on > build > >> > time > >> > > > > - checkstyle > >> > > > > - pmd > >> > > > > - jxr - needed by other reports > >> > > > > - taglist > >> > > > > - javadoc - require generate-sources > >> > > > > > >> > > > > - for plugins and extensions additional invoker report is added. > >> > > > > > >> > > > > I starting to think what of benefit we have, who is looking at > >> > reports > >> > > > > like: surefire, checkstyle, pmd, taglist > >> > > > > Maybe they are redundant - tests, checkstyle verification simply > >> must > >> > > > pass > >> > > > > > >> > > > > -- > >> > > > > Sławomir Jaranowski > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> - > >> > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > >> > > > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > -- > >> > > > Sławomir Jaranowski > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> - > >> > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > >> > > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > > >
Re: Review of used reports for Maven project sites.
Hi In next version of Maven parent - detectLinks from javadoc configurations was removed, so javadoc will not download remote resource, it was fails many times in this case - findbugs was removed - it also took a lot of time My proposition is to remove from reports: - surefire - checkstyle - pmd - taglist - invoker and finally - jxr chekstyle is used during build, if we want to use pmd should be included in build any other tests result are reported on jenkins for each build, I don't see benefit of such in documentations and of course I can change GH action to build site only on one node czw., 24 lut 2022 o 22:49 Tamás Cservenák napisał(a): > Olivier, > > please remove all the Jenkins checks from all of the Maven builds you added > without asking anyone about adding it. > The release manager should ensure beforehand it is all ok, if not, try to > fix it, if the issue is bigger, still can decide to rollback the change. > > Thanks > T > > > > On Thu, Feb 24, 2022 at 10:14 PM Tamás Cservenák > wrote: > > > Building javadoc is slow and very fragile (fetches remote resources, > chews > > on stuff etc). > > Why not have a savvy release manager ensuring it is building, and calling > > out PR authors to fix it? > > The Worst can happen is rel mgr rollback the chnge if the PR author is > > unresponsive. > > > > On Thu, Feb 24, 2022 at 10:01 PM Olivier Lamy wrote: > > > >> Please read what I say. I'm just mentioning javadoc as contributors > >> and committers can fail the build with bad javadoc but we will not see > it. > >> > >> On Fri, 25 Feb 2022 at 06:47, Tamás Cservenák > >> wrote: > >> > >> > Building everything for each commit is insane. > >> > > >> > Also, I find a release mgr that does NOT check is site building > >> beforehand > >> > release as sloppy. > >> > > >> > Hence, building everything on each commit just to suit sloppy release > >> mgrs > >> > is insane IMHO. > >> > > >> > My 5 cents. > >> > > >> > T > >> > > >> > On Thu, Feb 24, 2022 at 9:30 PM Olivier Lamy > wrote: > >> > > >> > > Sounds good. > >> > > But who has never released something and having javadoc failing in > >> the > >> > > middle of the release or the site generation failing once tag done > and > >> > > artifacts staged… I find this a pain > >> > > > >> > > Maybe only testing javadoc works at least ? > >> > > > >> > > Btw I agree some reports could be removed > >> > > > >> > > On Fri, 25 Feb 2022 at 6:24 am, wrote: > >> > > > >> > > > and reporting profile was done for this: > >> > > > - without reporting profile, just light site generation > >> > > > - with reporting profile, full documentation site > >> > > > > >> > > > disabling reporting profile for CI should do the job > >> > > > > >> > > > - Mail original - > >> > > > De: "herve boutemy" > >> > > > À: "Maven Developers List" > >> > > > Envoyé: Jeudi 24 Février 2022 21:21:45 > >> > > > Objet: Re: Review of used reports for Maven project sites. > >> > > > > >> > > > done on GH and Jenkins, then on each commit? > >> > > > we're heating oceans for nothing > >> > > > > >> > > > IMHO, we need to differentiate CI vs release documentation: CI > >> should > >> > be > >> > > > much lighter than release > >> > > > > >> > > > - Mail original - > >> > > > De: "Slawomir Jaranowski" > >> > > > À: "Maven Developers List" > >> > > > Envoyé: Jeudi 24 Février 2022 20:53:49 > >> > > > Objet: Re: Review of used reports for Maven project sites. > >> > > > > >> > > > Yes is done after release but also on jenkins for plugins and on > GH > >> > > builds > >> > > > > >> > > > czw., 24 lut 2022 o 20:43 napisał(a): > >> > > > > >> > > > > full site building with reports enabled (through reporting > >> profile) > >> > is > >> > > > > just done after release, isn't it? > >> > > > > > >
Re: Review of used reports for Maven project sites.
Olivier, please remove all the Jenkins checks from all of the Maven builds you added without asking anyone about adding it. The release manager should ensure beforehand it is all ok, if not, try to fix it, if the issue is bigger, still can decide to rollback the change. Thanks T On Thu, Feb 24, 2022 at 10:14 PM Tamás Cservenák wrote: > Building javadoc is slow and very fragile (fetches remote resources, chews > on stuff etc). > Why not have a savvy release manager ensuring it is building, and calling > out PR authors to fix it? > The Worst can happen is rel mgr rollback the chnge if the PR author is > unresponsive. > > On Thu, Feb 24, 2022 at 10:01 PM Olivier Lamy wrote: > >> Please read what I say. I'm just mentioning javadoc as contributors >> and committers can fail the build with bad javadoc but we will not see it. >> >> On Fri, 25 Feb 2022 at 06:47, Tamás Cservenák >> wrote: >> >> > Building everything for each commit is insane. >> > >> > Also, I find a release mgr that does NOT check is site building >> beforehand >> > release as sloppy. >> > >> > Hence, building everything on each commit just to suit sloppy release >> mgrs >> > is insane IMHO. >> > >> > My 5 cents. >> > >> > T >> > >> > On Thu, Feb 24, 2022 at 9:30 PM Olivier Lamy wrote: >> > >> > > Sounds good. >> > > But who has never released something and having javadoc failing in >> the >> > > middle of the release or the site generation failing once tag done and >> > > artifacts staged… I find this a pain >> > > >> > > Maybe only testing javadoc works at least ? >> > > >> > > Btw I agree some reports could be removed >> > > >> > > On Fri, 25 Feb 2022 at 6:24 am, wrote: >> > > >> > > > and reporting profile was done for this: >> > > > - without reporting profile, just light site generation >> > > > - with reporting profile, full documentation site >> > > > >> > > > disabling reporting profile for CI should do the job >> > > > >> > > > - Mail original - >> > > > De: "herve boutemy" >> > > > À: "Maven Developers List" >> > > > Envoyé: Jeudi 24 Février 2022 21:21:45 >> > > > Objet: Re: Review of used reports for Maven project sites. >> > > > >> > > > done on GH and Jenkins, then on each commit? >> > > > we're heating oceans for nothing >> > > > >> > > > IMHO, we need to differentiate CI vs release documentation: CI >> should >> > be >> > > > much lighter than release >> > > > >> > > > - Mail original - >> > > > De: "Slawomir Jaranowski" >> > > > À: "Maven Developers List" >> > > > Envoyé: Jeudi 24 Février 2022 20:53:49 >> > > > Objet: Re: Review of used reports for Maven project sites. >> > > > >> > > > Yes is done after release but also on jenkins for plugins and on GH >> > > builds >> > > > >> > > > czw., 24 lut 2022 o 20:43 napisał(a): >> > > > >> > > > > full site building with reports enabled (through reporting >> profile) >> > is >> > > > > just done after release, isn't it? >> > > > > >> > > > > - Mail original - >> > > > > De: "Slawomir Jaranowski" >> > > > > À: "Maven Developers List" >> > > > > Envoyé: Jeudi 24 Février 2022 20:24:56 >> > > > > Objet: Review of used reports for Maven project sites. >> > > > > >> > > > > Hi, >> > > > > >> > > > > Building the Maven site takes a long time for our projects. >> > > > > >> > > > > Before releasing the next version of maven-parent, I have a >> proposal >> > to >> > > > > review used Maven site reports. >> > > > > >> > > > > So >> > > > > >> > > > > - without reporting profile, standard >> > > maven-project-info-reports-plugin >> > > > - >> > > > > build very quick - no problems >> > > > > >> > > > > - with reporting profile: >> > > > > - surefire - require test phase - can have influence on build >> > time >> > > > > - checkstyle >> > > > > - pmd >> > > > > - jxr - needed by other reports >> > > > > - taglist >> > > > > - javadoc - require generate-sources >> > > > > >> > > > > - for plugins and extensions additional invoker report is added. >> > > > > >> > > > > I starting to think what of benefit we have, who is looking at >> > reports >> > > > > like: surefire, checkstyle, pmd, taglist >> > > > > Maybe they are redundant - tests, checkstyle verification simply >> must >> > > > pass >> > > > > >> > > > > -- >> > > > > Sławomir Jaranowski >> > > > > >> > > > > >> - >> > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org >> > > > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > > -- >> > > > Sławomir Jaranowski >> > > > >> > > > >> - >> > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org >> > > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org >> > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > >> >
Re: Review of used reports for Maven project sites.
Building javadoc is slow and very fragile (fetches remote resources, chews on stuff etc). Why not have a savvy release manager ensuring it is building, and calling out PR authors to fix it? The Worst can happen is rel mgr rollback the chnge if the PR author is unresponsive. On Thu, Feb 24, 2022 at 10:01 PM Olivier Lamy wrote: > Please read what I say. I'm just mentioning javadoc as contributors > and committers can fail the build with bad javadoc but we will not see it. > > On Fri, 25 Feb 2022 at 06:47, Tamás Cservenák wrote: > > > Building everything for each commit is insane. > > > > Also, I find a release mgr that does NOT check is site building > beforehand > > release as sloppy. > > > > Hence, building everything on each commit just to suit sloppy release > mgrs > > is insane IMHO. > > > > My 5 cents. > > > > T > > > > On Thu, Feb 24, 2022 at 9:30 PM Olivier Lamy wrote: > > > > > Sounds good. > > > But who has never released something and having javadoc failing in the > > > middle of the release or the site generation failing once tag done and > > > artifacts staged… I find this a pain > > > > > > Maybe only testing javadoc works at least ? > > > > > > Btw I agree some reports could be removed > > > > > > On Fri, 25 Feb 2022 at 6:24 am, wrote: > > > > > > > and reporting profile was done for this: > > > > - without reporting profile, just light site generation > > > > - with reporting profile, full documentation site > > > > > > > > disabling reporting profile for CI should do the job > > > > > > > > - Mail original - > > > > De: "herve boutemy" > > > > À: "Maven Developers List" > > > > Envoyé: Jeudi 24 Février 2022 21:21:45 > > > > Objet: Re: Review of used reports for Maven project sites. > > > > > > > > done on GH and Jenkins, then on each commit? > > > > we're heating oceans for nothing > > > > > > > > IMHO, we need to differentiate CI vs release documentation: CI should > > be > > > > much lighter than release > > > > > > > > - Mail original - > > > > De: "Slawomir Jaranowski" > > > > À: "Maven Developers List" > > > > Envoyé: Jeudi 24 Février 2022 20:53:49 > > > > Objet: Re: Review of used reports for Maven project sites. > > > > > > > > Yes is done after release but also on jenkins for plugins and on GH > > > builds > > > > > > > > czw., 24 lut 2022 o 20:43 napisał(a): > > > > > > > > > full site building with reports enabled (through reporting profile) > > is > > > > > just done after release, isn't it? > > > > > > > > > > - Mail original - > > > > > De: "Slawomir Jaranowski" > > > > > À: "Maven Developers List" > > > > > Envoyé: Jeudi 24 Février 2022 20:24:56 > > > > > Objet: Review of used reports for Maven project sites. > > > > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > > > Building the Maven site takes a long time for our projects. > > > > > > > > > > Before releasing the next version of maven-parent, I have a > proposal > > to > > > > > review used Maven site reports. > > > > > > > > > > So > > > > > > > > > > - without reporting profile, standard > > > maven-project-info-reports-plugin > > > > - > > > > > build very quick - no problems > > > > > > > > > > - with reporting profile: > > > > > - surefire - require test phase - can have influence on build > > time > > > > > - checkstyle > > > > > - pmd > > > > > - jxr - needed by other reports > > > > > - taglist > > > > > - javadoc - require generate-sources > > > > > > > > > > - for plugins and extensions additional invoker report is added. > > > > > > > > > > I starting to think what of benefit we have, who is looking at > > reports > > > > > like: surefire, checkstyle, pmd, taglist > > > > > Maybe they are redundant - tests, checkstyle verification simply > must > > > > pass > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > Sławomir Jaranowski > > > > > > > > > > > - > > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > > > > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > Sławomir Jaranowski > > > > > > > > - > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > > > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
Re: Review of used reports for Maven project sites.
Sure, why not? Naturally, the workflow would have a step "ensure site passes" before doing it, so the workflow would not end up with javadoc failing in the middle of release. And I'd hope that workflow would not mind (or have any pain) just reporting this and stopping w/o attempting to perform a release. On Thu, Feb 24, 2022 at 9:59 PM Olivier Lamy wrote: > On Fri, 25 Feb 2022 at 06:53, Tamás Cservenák wrote: > > > Or, to rephrase; being a release mgr is not just about "a person doing $ > > mvn release:prepare release:perform and pressing ENTER". > > As if it is really just that, we would automate it, right? > > > > why not? :) > > > > > > T > > > > On Thu, Feb 24, 2022 at 9:47 PM Tamás Cservenák > > wrote: > > > > > Building everything for each commit is insane. > > > > > > Also, I find a release mgr that does NOT check is site building > > beforehand > > > release as sloppy. > > > > > > Hence, building everything on each commit just to suit sloppy release > > mgrs > > > is insane IMHO. > > > > > > My 5 cents. > > > > > > T > > > > > > On Thu, Feb 24, 2022 at 9:30 PM Olivier Lamy wrote: > > > > > >> Sounds good. > > >> But who has never released something and having javadoc failing in > the > > >> middle of the release or the site generation failing once tag done and > > >> artifacts staged… I find this a pain > > >> > > >> Maybe only testing javadoc works at least ? > > >> > > >> Btw I agree some reports could be removed > > >> > > >> On Fri, 25 Feb 2022 at 6:24 am, wrote: > > >> > > >> > and reporting profile was done for this: > > >> > - without reporting profile, just light site generation > > >> > - with reporting profile, full documentation site > > >> > > > >> > disabling reporting profile for CI should do the job > > >> > > > >> > - Mail original - > > >> > De: "herve boutemy" > > >> > À: "Maven Developers List" > > >> > Envoyé: Jeudi 24 Février 2022 21:21:45 > > >> > Objet: Re: Review of used reports for Maven project sites. > > >> > > > >> > done on GH and Jenkins, then on each commit? > > >> > we're heating oceans for nothing > > >> > > > >> > IMHO, we need to differentiate CI vs release documentation: CI > should > > be > > >> > much lighter than release > > >> > > > >> > - Mail original - > > >> > De: "Slawomir Jaranowski" > > >> > À: "Maven Developers List" > > >> > Envoyé: Jeudi 24 Février 2022 20:53:49 > > >> > Objet: Re: Review of used reports for Maven project sites. > > >> > > > >> > Yes is done after release but also on jenkins for plugins and on GH > > >> builds > > >> > > > >> > czw., 24 lut 2022 o 20:43 napisał(a): > > >> > > > >> > > full site building with reports enabled (through reporting > profile) > > is > > >> > > just done after release, isn't it? > > >> > > > > >> > > - Mail original - > > >> > > De: "Slawomir Jaranowski" > > >> > > À: "Maven Developers List" > > >> > > Envoyé: Jeudi 24 Février 2022 20:24:56 > > >> > > Objet: Review of used reports for Maven project sites. > > >> > > > > >> > > Hi, > > >> > > > > >> > > Building the Maven site takes a long time for our projects. > > >> > > > > >> > > Before releasing the next version of maven-parent, I have a > proposal > > >> to > > >> > > review used Maven site reports. > > >> > > > > >> > > So > > >> > > > > >> > > - without reporting profile, standard > > >> maven-project-info-reports-plugin > > >> > - > > >> > > build very quick - no problems > > >> > > > > >> > > - with reporting profile: > > >> > > - surefire - require test phase - can have influence on build > > >> time > > >> > > - checkstyle > > >> > > - pmd > > >> > > - jxr - needed by other reports > > >> > > - taglist > > >> > > - javadoc - require generate-sources > > >> > > > > >> > > - for plugins and extensions additional invoker report is added. > > >> > > > > >> > > I starting to think what of benefit we have, who is looking at > > reports > > >> > > like: surefire, checkstyle, pmd, taglist > > >> > > Maybe they are redundant - tests, checkstyle verification simply > > must > > >> > pass > > >> > > > > >> > > -- > > >> > > Sławomir Jaranowski > > >> > > > > >> > > > > - > > >> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > > >> > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > -- > > >> > Sławomir Jaranowski > > >> > > > >> > > - > > >> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > > >> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >
Re: Review of used reports for Maven project sites.
We have tried that on GitHub Actions and it was not terribly slow. It was only useless to force every build configuration to run the maven site. Notice that the GH Actions are quite fast and if you employ only one special run for "mvn site" with a deployment to a web container or gh_pages then it would be the same as checking the logs or test reports because we would check the particular HTMLs (not all.). On Thu, Feb 24, 2022 at 9:47 PM Tamás Cservenák wrote: > Building everything for each commit is insane. > > Also, I find a release mgr that does NOT check is site building beforehand > release as sloppy. > > Hence, building everything on each commit just to suit sloppy release mgrs > is insane IMHO. > > My 5 cents. > > T > > On Thu, Feb 24, 2022 at 9:30 PM Olivier Lamy wrote: > > > Sounds good. > > But who has never released something and having javadoc failing in the > > middle of the release or the site generation failing once tag done and > > artifacts staged… I find this a pain > > > > Maybe only testing javadoc works at least ? > > > > Btw I agree some reports could be removed > > > > On Fri, 25 Feb 2022 at 6:24 am, wrote: > > > > > and reporting profile was done for this: > > > - without reporting profile, just light site generation > > > - with reporting profile, full documentation site > > > > > > disabling reporting profile for CI should do the job > > > > > > - Mail original - > > > De: "herve boutemy" > > > À: "Maven Developers List" > > > Envoyé: Jeudi 24 Février 2022 21:21:45 > > > Objet: Re: Review of used reports for Maven project sites. > > > > > > done on GH and Jenkins, then on each commit? > > > we're heating oceans for nothing > > > > > > IMHO, we need to differentiate CI vs release documentation: CI should > be > > > much lighter than release > > > > > > - Mail original - > > > De: "Slawomir Jaranowski" > > > À: "Maven Developers List" > > > Envoyé: Jeudi 24 Février 2022 20:53:49 > > > Objet: Re: Review of used reports for Maven project sites. > > > > > > Yes is done after release but also on jenkins for plugins and on GH > > builds > > > > > > czw., 24 lut 2022 o 20:43 napisał(a): > > > > > > > full site building with reports enabled (through reporting profile) > is > > > > just done after release, isn't it? > > > > > > > > - Mail original - > > > > De: "Slawomir Jaranowski" > > > > À: "Maven Developers List" > > > > Envoyé: Jeudi 24 Février 2022 20:24:56 > > > > Objet: Review of used reports for Maven project sites. > > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > Building the Maven site takes a long time for our projects. > > > > > > > > Before releasing the next version of maven-parent, I have a proposal > to > > > > review used Maven site reports. > > > > > > > > So > > > > > > > > - without reporting profile, standard > > maven-project-info-reports-plugin > > > - > > > > build very quick - no problems > > > > > > > > - with reporting profile: > > > > - surefire - require test phase - can have influence on build > time > > > > - checkstyle > > > > - pmd > > > > - jxr - needed by other reports > > > > - taglist > > > > - javadoc - require generate-sources > > > > > > > > - for plugins and extensions additional invoker report is added. > > > > > > > > I starting to think what of benefit we have, who is looking at > reports > > > > like: surefire, checkstyle, pmd, taglist > > > > Maybe they are redundant - tests, checkstyle verification simply must > > > pass > > > > > > > > -- > > > > Sławomir Jaranowski > > > > > > > > - > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > > > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > Sławomir Jaranowski > > > > > > - > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org > > > > > > > > >
Re: Review of used reports for Maven project sites.
Please read what I say. I'm just mentioning javadoc as contributors and committers can fail the build with bad javadoc but we will not see it. On Fri, 25 Feb 2022 at 06:47, Tamás Cservenák wrote: > Building everything for each commit is insane. > > Also, I find a release mgr that does NOT check is site building beforehand > release as sloppy. > > Hence, building everything on each commit just to suit sloppy release mgrs > is insane IMHO. > > My 5 cents. > > T > > On Thu, Feb 24, 2022 at 9:30 PM Olivier Lamy wrote: > > > Sounds good. > > But who has never released something and having javadoc failing in the > > middle of the release or the site generation failing once tag done and > > artifacts staged… I find this a pain > > > > Maybe only testing javadoc works at least ? > > > > Btw I agree some reports could be removed > > > > On Fri, 25 Feb 2022 at 6:24 am, wrote: > > > > > and reporting profile was done for this: > > > - without reporting profile, just light site generation > > > - with reporting profile, full documentation site > > > > > > disabling reporting profile for CI should do the job > > > > > > - Mail original - > > > De: "herve boutemy" > > > À: "Maven Developers List" > > > Envoyé: Jeudi 24 Février 2022 21:21:45 > > > Objet: Re: Review of used reports for Maven project sites. > > > > > > done on GH and Jenkins, then on each commit? > > > we're heating oceans for nothing > > > > > > IMHO, we need to differentiate CI vs release documentation: CI should > be > > > much lighter than release > > > > > > - Mail original - > > > De: "Slawomir Jaranowski" > > > À: "Maven Developers List" > > > Envoyé: Jeudi 24 Février 2022 20:53:49 > > > Objet: Re: Review of used reports for Maven project sites. > > > > > > Yes is done after release but also on jenkins for plugins and on GH > > builds > > > > > > czw., 24 lut 2022 o 20:43 napisał(a): > > > > > > > full site building with reports enabled (through reporting profile) > is > > > > just done after release, isn't it? > > > > > > > > - Mail original - > > > > De: "Slawomir Jaranowski" > > > > À: "Maven Developers List" > > > > Envoyé: Jeudi 24 Février 2022 20:24:56 > > > > Objet: Review of used reports for Maven project sites. > > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > Building the Maven site takes a long time for our projects. > > > > > > > > Before releasing the next version of maven-parent, I have a proposal > to > > > > review used Maven site reports. > > > > > > > > So > > > > > > > > - without reporting profile, standard > > maven-project-info-reports-plugin > > > - > > > > build very quick - no problems > > > > > > > > - with reporting profile: > > > > - surefire - require test phase - can have influence on build > time > > > > - checkstyle > > > > - pmd > > > > - jxr - needed by other reports > > > > - taglist > > > > - javadoc - require generate-sources > > > > > > > > - for plugins and extensions additional invoker report is added. > > > > > > > > I starting to think what of benefit we have, who is looking at > reports > > > > like: surefire, checkstyle, pmd, taglist > > > > Maybe they are redundant - tests, checkstyle verification simply must > > > pass > > > > > > > > -- > > > > Sławomir Jaranowski > > > > > > > > - > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > > > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > Sławomir Jaranowski > > > > > > - > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org > > > > > > > > >
Re: Review of used reports for Maven project sites.
On Fri, 25 Feb 2022 at 06:53, Tamás Cservenák wrote: > Or, to rephrase; being a release mgr is not just about "a person doing $ > mvn release:prepare release:perform and pressing ENTER". > As if it is really just that, we would automate it, right? > why not? :) > > T > > On Thu, Feb 24, 2022 at 9:47 PM Tamás Cservenák > wrote: > > > Building everything for each commit is insane. > > > > Also, I find a release mgr that does NOT check is site building > beforehand > > release as sloppy. > > > > Hence, building everything on each commit just to suit sloppy release > mgrs > > is insane IMHO. > > > > My 5 cents. > > > > T > > > > On Thu, Feb 24, 2022 at 9:30 PM Olivier Lamy wrote: > > > >> Sounds good. > >> But who has never released something and having javadoc failing in the > >> middle of the release or the site generation failing once tag done and > >> artifacts staged… I find this a pain > >> > >> Maybe only testing javadoc works at least ? > >> > >> Btw I agree some reports could be removed > >> > >> On Fri, 25 Feb 2022 at 6:24 am, wrote: > >> > >> > and reporting profile was done for this: > >> > - without reporting profile, just light site generation > >> > - with reporting profile, full documentation site > >> > > >> > disabling reporting profile for CI should do the job > >> > > >> > - Mail original - > >> > De: "herve boutemy" > >> > À: "Maven Developers List" > >> > Envoyé: Jeudi 24 Février 2022 21:21:45 > >> > Objet: Re: Review of used reports for Maven project sites. > >> > > >> > done on GH and Jenkins, then on each commit? > >> > we're heating oceans for nothing > >> > > >> > IMHO, we need to differentiate CI vs release documentation: CI should > be > >> > much lighter than release > >> > > >> > - Mail original - > >> > De: "Slawomir Jaranowski" > >> > À: "Maven Developers List" > >> > Envoyé: Jeudi 24 Février 2022 20:53:49 > >> > Objet: Re: Review of used reports for Maven project sites. > >> > > >> > Yes is done after release but also on jenkins for plugins and on GH > >> builds > >> > > >> > czw., 24 lut 2022 o 20:43 napisał(a): > >> > > >> > > full site building with reports enabled (through reporting profile) > is > >> > > just done after release, isn't it? > >> > > > >> > > - Mail original - > >> > > De: "Slawomir Jaranowski" > >> > > À: "Maven Developers List" > >> > > Envoyé: Jeudi 24 Février 2022 20:24:56 > >> > > Objet: Review of used reports for Maven project sites. > >> > > > >> > > Hi, > >> > > > >> > > Building the Maven site takes a long time for our projects. > >> > > > >> > > Before releasing the next version of maven-parent, I have a proposal > >> to > >> > > review used Maven site reports. > >> > > > >> > > So > >> > > > >> > > - without reporting profile, standard > >> maven-project-info-reports-plugin > >> > - > >> > > build very quick - no problems > >> > > > >> > > - with reporting profile: > >> > > - surefire - require test phase - can have influence on build > >> time > >> > > - checkstyle > >> > > - pmd > >> > > - jxr - needed by other reports > >> > > - taglist > >> > > - javadoc - require generate-sources > >> > > > >> > > - for plugins and extensions additional invoker report is added. > >> > > > >> > > I starting to think what of benefit we have, who is looking at > reports > >> > > like: surefire, checkstyle, pmd, taglist > >> > > Maybe they are redundant - tests, checkstyle verification simply > must > >> > pass > >> > > > >> > > -- > >> > > Sławomir Jaranowski > >> > > > >> > > > - > >> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > >> > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > -- > >> > Sławomir Jaranowski > >> > > >> > - > >> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > >> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org > >> > > >> > > >> > > >
Re: Review of used reports for Maven project sites.
Or, to rephrase; being a release mgr is not just about "a person doing $ mvn release:prepare release:perform and pressing ENTER". As if it is really just that, we would automate it, right? T On Thu, Feb 24, 2022 at 9:47 PM Tamás Cservenák wrote: > Building everything for each commit is insane. > > Also, I find a release mgr that does NOT check is site building beforehand > release as sloppy. > > Hence, building everything on each commit just to suit sloppy release mgrs > is insane IMHO. > > My 5 cents. > > T > > On Thu, Feb 24, 2022 at 9:30 PM Olivier Lamy wrote: > >> Sounds good. >> But who has never released something and having javadoc failing in the >> middle of the release or the site generation failing once tag done and >> artifacts staged… I find this a pain >> >> Maybe only testing javadoc works at least ? >> >> Btw I agree some reports could be removed >> >> On Fri, 25 Feb 2022 at 6:24 am, wrote: >> >> > and reporting profile was done for this: >> > - without reporting profile, just light site generation >> > - with reporting profile, full documentation site >> > >> > disabling reporting profile for CI should do the job >> > >> > - Mail original - >> > De: "herve boutemy" >> > À: "Maven Developers List" >> > Envoyé: Jeudi 24 Février 2022 21:21:45 >> > Objet: Re: Review of used reports for Maven project sites. >> > >> > done on GH and Jenkins, then on each commit? >> > we're heating oceans for nothing >> > >> > IMHO, we need to differentiate CI vs release documentation: CI should be >> > much lighter than release >> > >> > - Mail original - >> > De: "Slawomir Jaranowski" >> > À: "Maven Developers List" >> > Envoyé: Jeudi 24 Février 2022 20:53:49 >> > Objet: Re: Review of used reports for Maven project sites. >> > >> > Yes is done after release but also on jenkins for plugins and on GH >> builds >> > >> > czw., 24 lut 2022 o 20:43 napisał(a): >> > >> > > full site building with reports enabled (through reporting profile) is >> > > just done after release, isn't it? >> > > >> > > - Mail original - >> > > De: "Slawomir Jaranowski" >> > > À: "Maven Developers List" >> > > Envoyé: Jeudi 24 Février 2022 20:24:56 >> > > Objet: Review of used reports for Maven project sites. >> > > >> > > Hi, >> > > >> > > Building the Maven site takes a long time for our projects. >> > > >> > > Before releasing the next version of maven-parent, I have a proposal >> to >> > > review used Maven site reports. >> > > >> > > So >> > > >> > > - without reporting profile, standard >> maven-project-info-reports-plugin >> > - >> > > build very quick - no problems >> > > >> > > - with reporting profile: >> > > - surefire - require test phase - can have influence on build >> time >> > > - checkstyle >> > > - pmd >> > > - jxr - needed by other reports >> > > - taglist >> > > - javadoc - require generate-sources >> > > >> > > - for plugins and extensions additional invoker report is added. >> > > >> > > I starting to think what of benefit we have, who is looking at reports >> > > like: surefire, checkstyle, pmd, taglist >> > > Maybe they are redundant - tests, checkstyle verification simply must >> > pass >> > > >> > > -- >> > > Sławomir Jaranowski >> > > >> > > - >> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org >> > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org >> > > >> > > >> > >> > -- >> > Sławomir Jaranowski >> > >> > - >> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org >> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org >> > >> > >> >
Re: Review of used reports for Maven project sites.
Building everything for each commit is insane. Also, I find a release mgr that does NOT check is site building beforehand release as sloppy. Hence, building everything on each commit just to suit sloppy release mgrs is insane IMHO. My 5 cents. T On Thu, Feb 24, 2022 at 9:30 PM Olivier Lamy wrote: > Sounds good. > But who has never released something and having javadoc failing in the > middle of the release or the site generation failing once tag done and > artifacts staged… I find this a pain > > Maybe only testing javadoc works at least ? > > Btw I agree some reports could be removed > > On Fri, 25 Feb 2022 at 6:24 am, wrote: > > > and reporting profile was done for this: > > - without reporting profile, just light site generation > > - with reporting profile, full documentation site > > > > disabling reporting profile for CI should do the job > > > > - Mail original - > > De: "herve boutemy" > > À: "Maven Developers List" > > Envoyé: Jeudi 24 Février 2022 21:21:45 > > Objet: Re: Review of used reports for Maven project sites. > > > > done on GH and Jenkins, then on each commit? > > we're heating oceans for nothing > > > > IMHO, we need to differentiate CI vs release documentation: CI should be > > much lighter than release > > > > ----- Mail original - > > De: "Slawomir Jaranowski" > > À: "Maven Developers List" > > Envoyé: Jeudi 24 Février 2022 20:53:49 > > Objet: Re: Review of used reports for Maven project sites. > > > > Yes is done after release but also on jenkins for plugins and on GH > builds > > > > czw., 24 lut 2022 o 20:43 napisał(a): > > > > > full site building with reports enabled (through reporting profile) is > > > just done after release, isn't it? > > > > > > - Mail original - > > > De: "Slawomir Jaranowski" > > > À: "Maven Developers List" > > > Envoyé: Jeudi 24 Février 2022 20:24:56 > > > Objet: Review of used reports for Maven project sites. > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > Building the Maven site takes a long time for our projects. > > > > > > Before releasing the next version of maven-parent, I have a proposal to > > > review used Maven site reports. > > > > > > So > > > > > > - without reporting profile, standard > maven-project-info-reports-plugin > > - > > > build very quick - no problems > > > > > > - with reporting profile: > > > - surefire - require test phase - can have influence on build time > > > - checkstyle > > > - pmd > > > - jxr - needed by other reports > > > - taglist > > > - javadoc - require generate-sources > > > > > > - for plugins and extensions additional invoker report is added. > > > > > > I starting to think what of benefit we have, who is looking at reports > > > like: surefire, checkstyle, pmd, taglist > > > Maybe they are redundant - tests, checkstyle verification simply must > > pass > > > > > > -- > > > Sławomir Jaranowski > > > > > > - > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Sławomir Jaranowski > > > > - > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org > > > > >
Re: Review of used reports for Maven project sites.
Sounds good. But who has never released something and having javadoc failing in the middle of the release or the site generation failing once tag done and artifacts staged… I find this a pain Maybe only testing javadoc works at least ? Btw I agree some reports could be removed On Fri, 25 Feb 2022 at 6:24 am, wrote: > and reporting profile was done for this: > - without reporting profile, just light site generation > - with reporting profile, full documentation site > > disabling reporting profile for CI should do the job > > - Mail original - > De: "herve boutemy" > À: "Maven Developers List" > Envoyé: Jeudi 24 Février 2022 21:21:45 > Objet: Re: Review of used reports for Maven project sites. > > done on GH and Jenkins, then on each commit? > we're heating oceans for nothing > > IMHO, we need to differentiate CI vs release documentation: CI should be > much lighter than release > > - Mail original - > De: "Slawomir Jaranowski" > À: "Maven Developers List" > Envoyé: Jeudi 24 Février 2022 20:53:49 > Objet: Re: Review of used reports for Maven project sites. > > Yes is done after release but also on jenkins for plugins and on GH builds > > czw., 24 lut 2022 o 20:43 napisał(a): > > > full site building with reports enabled (through reporting profile) is > > just done after release, isn't it? > > > > - Mail original - > > De: "Slawomir Jaranowski" > > À: "Maven Developers List" > > Envoyé: Jeudi 24 Février 2022 20:24:56 > > Objet: Review of used reports for Maven project sites. > > > > Hi, > > > > Building the Maven site takes a long time for our projects. > > > > Before releasing the next version of maven-parent, I have a proposal to > > review used Maven site reports. > > > > So > > > > - without reporting profile, standard maven-project-info-reports-plugin > - > > build very quick - no problems > > > > - with reporting profile: > > - surefire - require test phase - can have influence on build time > > - checkstyle > > - pmd > > - jxr - needed by other reports > > - taglist > > - javadoc - require generate-sources > > > > - for plugins and extensions additional invoker report is added. > > > > I starting to think what of benefit we have, who is looking at reports > > like: surefire, checkstyle, pmd, taglist > > Maybe they are redundant - tests, checkstyle verification simply must > pass > > > > -- > > Sławomir Jaranowski > > > > - > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org > > > > > > -- > Sławomir Jaranowski > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org > >
Re: Review of used reports for Maven project sites.
There is such a situation where the contributor changes the site, we vote for his PR on GH but we lately find out that the site is broken in some way. If I could see the site deployed to gh_pages which is a Git branch and visualized on GH then the contributor would fix it much better. Of course building the site with all the combinations of Maven & JDK would be an overhead. One run is enough. T On Thu, Feb 24, 2022 at 8:25 PM Slawomir Jaranowski wrote: > Hi, > > Building the Maven site takes a long time for our projects. > > Before releasing the next version of maven-parent, I have a proposal to > review used Maven site reports. > > So > > - without reporting profile, standard maven-project-info-reports-plugin - > build very quick - no problems > > - with reporting profile: > - surefire - require test phase - can have influence on build time > - checkstyle > - pmd > - jxr - needed by other reports > - taglist > - javadoc - require generate-sources > > - for plugins and extensions additional invoker report is added. > > I starting to think what of benefit we have, who is looking at reports > like: surefire, checkstyle, pmd, taglist > Maybe they are redundant - tests, checkstyle verification simply must pass > > -- > Sławomir Jaranowski >
Re: Review of used reports for Maven project sites.
and reporting profile was done for this: - without reporting profile, just light site generation - with reporting profile, full documentation site disabling reporting profile for CI should do the job - Mail original - De: "herve boutemy" À: "Maven Developers List" Envoyé: Jeudi 24 Février 2022 21:21:45 Objet: Re: Review of used reports for Maven project sites. done on GH and Jenkins, then on each commit? we're heating oceans for nothing IMHO, we need to differentiate CI vs release documentation: CI should be much lighter than release - Mail original - De: "Slawomir Jaranowski" À: "Maven Developers List" Envoyé: Jeudi 24 Février 2022 20:53:49 Objet: Re: Review of used reports for Maven project sites. Yes is done after release but also on jenkins for plugins and on GH builds czw., 24 lut 2022 o 20:43 napisał(a): > full site building with reports enabled (through reporting profile) is > just done after release, isn't it? > > - Mail original - > De: "Slawomir Jaranowski" > À: "Maven Developers List" > Envoyé: Jeudi 24 Février 2022 20:24:56 > Objet: Review of used reports for Maven project sites. > > Hi, > > Building the Maven site takes a long time for our projects. > > Before releasing the next version of maven-parent, I have a proposal to > review used Maven site reports. > > So > > - without reporting profile, standard maven-project-info-reports-plugin - > build very quick - no problems > > - with reporting profile: > - surefire - require test phase - can have influence on build time > - checkstyle > - pmd > - jxr - needed by other reports > - taglist > - javadoc - require generate-sources > > - for plugins and extensions additional invoker report is added. > > I starting to think what of benefit we have, who is looking at reports > like: surefire, checkstyle, pmd, taglist > Maybe they are redundant - tests, checkstyle verification simply must pass > > -- > Sławomir Jaranowski > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org > > -- Sławomir Jaranowski - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
Re: Review of used reports for Maven project sites.
done on GH and Jenkins, then on each commit? we're heating oceans for nothing IMHO, we need to differentiate CI vs release documentation: CI should be much lighter than release - Mail original - De: "Slawomir Jaranowski" À: "Maven Developers List" Envoyé: Jeudi 24 Février 2022 20:53:49 Objet: Re: Review of used reports for Maven project sites. Yes is done after release but also on jenkins for plugins and on GH builds czw., 24 lut 2022 o 20:43 napisał(a): > full site building with reports enabled (through reporting profile) is > just done after release, isn't it? > > - Mail original - > De: "Slawomir Jaranowski" > À: "Maven Developers List" > Envoyé: Jeudi 24 Février 2022 20:24:56 > Objet: Review of used reports for Maven project sites. > > Hi, > > Building the Maven site takes a long time for our projects. > > Before releasing the next version of maven-parent, I have a proposal to > review used Maven site reports. > > So > > - without reporting profile, standard maven-project-info-reports-plugin - > build very quick - no problems > > - with reporting profile: > - surefire - require test phase - can have influence on build time > - checkstyle > - pmd > - jxr - needed by other reports > - taglist > - javadoc - require generate-sources > > - for plugins and extensions additional invoker report is added. > > I starting to think what of benefit we have, who is looking at reports > like: surefire, checkstyle, pmd, taglist > Maybe they are redundant - tests, checkstyle verification simply must pass > > -- > Sławomir Jaranowski > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org > > -- Sławomir Jaranowski - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
Re: Review of used reports for Maven project sites.
Yes is done after release but also on jenkins for plugins and on GH builds czw., 24 lut 2022 o 20:43 napisał(a): > full site building with reports enabled (through reporting profile) is > just done after release, isn't it? > > - Mail original - > De: "Slawomir Jaranowski" > À: "Maven Developers List" > Envoyé: Jeudi 24 Février 2022 20:24:56 > Objet: Review of used reports for Maven project sites. > > Hi, > > Building the Maven site takes a long time for our projects. > > Before releasing the next version of maven-parent, I have a proposal to > review used Maven site reports. > > So > > - without reporting profile, standard maven-project-info-reports-plugin - > build very quick - no problems > > - with reporting profile: > - surefire - require test phase - can have influence on build time > - checkstyle > - pmd > - jxr - needed by other reports > - taglist > - javadoc - require generate-sources > > - for plugins and extensions additional invoker report is added. > > I starting to think what of benefit we have, who is looking at reports > like: surefire, checkstyle, pmd, taglist > Maybe they are redundant - tests, checkstyle verification simply must pass > > -- > Sławomir Jaranowski > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org > > -- Sławomir Jaranowski
Re: Review of used reports for Maven project sites.
full site building with reports enabled (through reporting profile) is just done after release, isn't it? - Mail original - De: "Slawomir Jaranowski" À: "Maven Developers List" Envoyé: Jeudi 24 Février 2022 20:24:56 Objet: Review of used reports for Maven project sites. Hi, Building the Maven site takes a long time for our projects. Before releasing the next version of maven-parent, I have a proposal to review used Maven site reports. So - without reporting profile, standard maven-project-info-reports-plugin - build very quick - no problems - with reporting profile: - surefire - require test phase - can have influence on build time - checkstyle - pmd - jxr - needed by other reports - taglist - javadoc - require generate-sources - for plugins and extensions additional invoker report is added. I starting to think what of benefit we have, who is looking at reports like: surefire, checkstyle, pmd, taglist Maybe they are redundant - tests, checkstyle verification simply must pass -- Sławomir Jaranowski - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
