Re: Intellij Idea warning as error with -Xdoclint

[Andor Molnar]

Yes, my main concern is: why does the maven succeed, if we're still
having javadoc issues?

Andor


-Original Message-
From: Enrico Olivelli 
Reply-To: dev@zookeeper.apache.org
To: dev@zookeeper.apache.org
Subject: Re: Intellij Idea warning as error with -Xdoclint
Date: Mon, 15 Jul 2019 21:58:09 +0200

Il lun 15 lug 2019, 13:53 Andor Molnar <
an...@apache.org
> ha scritto:

> Hi Enrico,
> 
> This is still an issue for me in IDEA:
> 
> Javadoc problems found in zookeeper-jute and zookeeper-server
> projects, so
> the build eventually fails. Strange thing is that running maven from
> command line doesn’t show any warning nor error.
> 
> From javac params -Werror and -Xdoclint I think IDEA’s behaviour is
> correct.
> 
> Most warning messages in IDEA are about missing javadoc comments, so
> changing it to "-Xdoclint:-missing” solves the problem.
> 

I can try to understand better.
If I understand correctly your point is that apparently Idea is working
as
expected but Maven not and this is not good because CI runs with Maven.

I will be back with news.
Hopefully we can fix javadocs and have a reliable way to detect issues
on
docs on CI/precommit/nightly

Enrico


> Regards,
> Andor
> 
> 
> 
> 
> > On 2019. Jun 20., at 20:28, Andor Molnar <
> > an...@apache.org
> > > wrote:
> > 
> > Done. #983 merged, problem gone.
> > Thanks maoling!
> > 
> > Andor
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > > On 2019. Jun 20., at 15:43, maoling <
> > > maoling199210...@sina.com
> > > > wrote:
> > > 
> > > I also noticed this when running UT with IDEA.may we can merge
> > > this PR:
> > > https://github.com/apache/zookeeper/pull/988
> > > 
> > > Or this one: 
> > > https://github.com/apache/zookeeper/pull/983
> > >  to remove
> 
> that warning.
> > > 发送自 Windows 10 版邮件应用
> > > 
> > > 发件人: Andor Molnar
> > > 发送时间: 2019年6月20日 5:46
> > > 收件人: DevZooKeeper
> > > 主题: Intellij Idea warning as error with -Xdoclint
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Hi Enrico,
> > > 
> > > I have the following error message in Idea since -Xdoclint is
> > > enabled
> 
> in the main pom.xml file:
> > > 
> 
> /Users/andormolnar/git/my-zookeeper/zookeeper-
> jute/src/main/java/org/apache/jute/Utils.java
> > > Error:(194, 15) java: @param name not found
> > > Error:(231, 15) java: @param name not found
> > > 
> > > Strange that I don’t see the same warnings in console when
> > > running ‘mvn
> 
> install’.
> > > I confirm that removing “-Xdoclint” (or fixing javadoc issues)
> > > solves
> 
> the problem.
> > > Andor
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> 
> 

Re: Re: Re: Re: Clean up the all the checkstyle violations in the zookeeper-server module

[Zili Chen]

Hi Justin,

Thanks for driving this thread. Please go ahead!

One thing I'd like to pick up is that ZOOKEEPER-3431
has a specific description and I'm afraid it could not
be an umbrella issue.

How about close all checkstyle related issues and start
a new issues structure as

Umbrella: Enable Google checkstyle configuration
  Subtask-1: Add silent Google checkstyle configuration
  Subtask-2: Enable Google checkstyle configuration on zookeeper-server
  Subtask-3: Enable Google checkstyle configuration on zookeeper-jute
  Subtask-4: Enable Google checkstyle configuration on zookeeper-prometheus
  ...

Best,
tison.


Enrico Olivelli  于2019年7月16日周二 上午12:06写道：

> Il lun 15 lug 2019, 09:14 Justin Ling Mao  ha
> scritto:
>
> > - any advance for the discussion???- any objections about these two
> > things: 1.only clean the main-module:zookeeper-server;
>
>
> Please add jute and Prometheus module
>
> 2.using the google's checkstyle_style?-
>
>
> Works for me
>
> > who will head it up?  how about me？
> >
>
> Sure! Go for it. Thanks
>
> Enrico
>
> >
> >
> > - Original Message -
> > From: "Justin Ling Mao" 
> > To: "dev" 
> > Subject: Re: Re: Re: Clean up the all the checkstyle violations in the
> > zookeeper-server module
> > Date: 2019-07-07 15:56
> >
> > 1.--->“we'd better first create an umbrella issue named "Enable
> checkstyle
> > rules" or sth”I had created ZOOKEEPER-3431 previously, and we can create
> a
> > series of sub-tasks under it.
> > 2.I think we still have two things which should be discussed:  2.1
> > Currently, we only need to enforce the checkstyle violations check in the
> > main-module:zookeeper-server, not included other modules?  IMO,
> because
> > the zookeeper-contrib, zookeeper-recipes are now not well-maintained.
> > and some violations in the zookeeper-jute are auto-generated. so focusing
> > on zookeeper-server is enough?
> >   2.2 What checkstyle template we will pick up? Now we have three
> > options:  A:[google_style](
> > https://checkstyle.sourceforge.io/google_style.html)
> > B:[bookkeeper_style] (
> >
> https://github.com/apache/bookkeeper/blob/master/buildtools/src/main/resources/bookkeeper/checkstyle.xml
> )
> > C:[hbase_style](
> >
> https://github.com/apache/hbase/blob/master/hbase-checkstyle/src/main/resources/hbase/checkstyle.xml
> )
> > Which one will we choose?
> >
> >
> > - Original Message -
> > From: Enrico Olivelli 
> > To: dev@zookeeper.apache.org
> > Cc: maoling199210...@sina.com
> > Subject: Re: Re: Clean up the all the checkstyle violations in the
> > zookeeper-server module
> > Date: 2019-07-07 15:13
> >
> > Il dom 7 lug 2019, 01:29 Zili Chen  ha scritto:
> > > Justin & Enrico,
> > >
> > > Receiving no opposition on this proposal, we could regard it as
> > > a consensus. According to bookkeeper#230 we'd better first create
> > > an umbrella issue named "Enable checkstyle rules" or sth. Under
> > > there we can finally decide the checkstyle configuration and
> > > start sub-tasks enabling per package.
> > >
> > > For keeping current checkstyle, I'd like to pick up that it's
> > > possible that we remain the current simple config for all pkgs,
> > > adding a config said copied from bookkeeper named
> > > "strict-checkstyle.xml", enabling per pkg, which contains @author
> > > tags and rules in simple config. Once we enabling the strict one
> > > for all pkgs. We can merge two configs into one.
> > >
> > +1 please go ahead
> > Enrico
> > > Best,
> > > tison.
> > >
> > >
> > > Enrico Olivelli  于2019年7月6日周六 下午8:20写道：
> > >
> > > > Justin,
> > > > This is how we did it in Bookkeeper, we enabled checkstyle only for
> > group
> > > > of packages in the main module (the biggest one, bookkeeper-server)
> > > >
> > > > https://github.com/apache/bookkeeper/issues/230
> > > >
> > > > I suggest using that checkstyle config, I feel we won't have so many
> > > > violations.
> > > >
> > > > We can keep current checkstyle invokation that checks for @author
> tags
> > > as a
> > > > separate 'execution' of the plugin with a specific checkstyle file
> (as
> > > you
> > > > already said)
> > > >
> > > > I am happy to help, thank you for driving this effort
> > > >
> > > > Enrico
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Il sab 6 lug 2019, 11:33 Justin Ling Mao 
> > ha
> > > > scritto:
> > > >
> > > > > - 1.It seems that we had reached a consensus to work on this.- 2.I
> > also
> > > > > agree on the way: fix one package at a time, then another.- 3.Now
> Let
> > > us
> > > > > discuss some details:- 3.1 how to make the checkstyle only
> check
> > > the
> > > > > package we specify? I found this:  URL:
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://stackoverflow.com/questions/26455174/only-enable-some-checks-for-certain-inner-package
> > > > > @Olivelli Could you give me more your insight?- 3.2 What
> > rules
> > > > will
> > > > > we init in the checkstyle.xml?   3.2.1 - I also think the rules
> > > from
> > > > > the hbase is too strict which will cause too 

ZooKeeper-trunk - Build # 617 - Still Failing

[Apache Jenkins Server]

See https://builds.apache.org/job/ZooKeeper-trunk/617/

###
## LAST 60 LINES OF THE CONSOLE 
###
[...truncated 190.19 KB...]
[junit] Running org.apache.zookeeper.test.SessionTest in thread 3
[junit] Tests run: 1, Failures: 0, Errors: 0, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 
85.754 sec, Thread: 4, Class: org.apache.zookeeper.test.RecoveryTest
[junit] Running org.apache.zookeeper.test.SessionTimeoutTest in thread 4
[junit] Tests run: 5, Failures: 0, Errors: 0, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 
2.402 sec, Thread: 4, Class: org.apache.zookeeper.test.SessionTimeoutTest
[junit] Running org.apache.zookeeper.test.SessionTrackerCheckTest in thread 
4
[junit] Tests run: 2, Failures: 0, Errors: 0, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 
0.103 sec, Thread: 4, Class: org.apache.zookeeper.test.SessionTrackerCheckTest
[junit] Running org.apache.zookeeper.test.SessionUpgradeTest in thread 4
[junit] Tests run: 6, Failures: 0, Errors: 0, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 
16.485 sec, Thread: 3, Class: org.apache.zookeeper.test.SessionTest
[junit] Running org.apache.zookeeper.test.StandaloneTest in thread 3
[junit] Tests run: 4, Failures: 0, Errors: 0, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 
3.065 sec, Thread: 3, Class: org.apache.zookeeper.test.StandaloneTest
[junit] Running org.apache.zookeeper.test.StatTest in thread 3
[junit] Tests run: 4, Failures: 0, Errors: 0, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 
2.309 sec, Thread: 3, Class: org.apache.zookeeper.test.StatTest
[junit] Tests run: 4, Failures: 0, Errors: 0, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 
10.566 sec, Thread: 4, Class: org.apache.zookeeper.test.SessionUpgradeTest
[junit] Running org.apache.zookeeper.test.StaticHostProviderTest in thread 3
[junit] Running org.apache.zookeeper.test.StringUtilTest in thread 4
[junit] Tests run: 1, Failures: 0, Errors: 0, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 
0.075 sec, Thread: 4, Class: org.apache.zookeeper.test.StringUtilTest
[junit] Running org.apache.zookeeper.test.SyncCallTest in thread 4
[junit] Tests run: 1, Failures: 0, Errors: 0, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 
0.951 sec, Thread: 4, Class: org.apache.zookeeper.test.SyncCallTest
[junit] Tests run: 26, Failures: 0, Errors: 0, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 
2.344 sec, Thread: 3, Class: org.apache.zookeeper.test.StaticHostProviderTest
[junit] Running org.apache.zookeeper.test.TruncateTest in thread 4
[junit] Running org.apache.zookeeper.test.WatchEventWhenAutoResetTest in 
thread 3
[junit] Tests run: 3, Failures: 0, Errors: 0, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 
13.43 sec, Thread: 4, Class: org.apache.zookeeper.test.TruncateTest
[junit] Running org.apache.zookeeper.test.WatchedEventTest in thread 4
[junit] Tests run: 4, Failures: 0, Errors: 0, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 
0.098 sec, Thread: 4, Class: org.apache.zookeeper.test.WatchedEventTest
[junit] Running org.apache.zookeeper.test.WatcherFuncTest in thread 4
[junit] Tests run: 4, Failures: 0, Errors: 0, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 
16.087 sec, Thread: 3, Class: 
org.apache.zookeeper.test.WatchEventWhenAutoResetTest
[junit] Running org.apache.zookeeper.test.WatcherTest in thread 3
[junit] Tests run: 6, Failures: 0, Errors: 0, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 
5.187 sec, Thread: 4, Class: org.apache.zookeeper.test.WatcherFuncTest
[junit] Running org.apache.zookeeper.test.X509AuthTest in thread 4
[junit] Tests run: 3, Failures: 0, Errors: 0, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 
0.116 sec, Thread: 4, Class: org.apache.zookeeper.test.X509AuthTest
[junit] Running org.apache.zookeeper.test.ZkDatabaseCorruptionTest in 
thread 4
[junit] Tests run: 2, Failures: 0, Errors: 0, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 
9.935 sec, Thread: 4, Class: org.apache.zookeeper.test.ZkDatabaseCorruptionTest
[junit] Running org.apache.zookeeper.test.ZooKeeperQuotaTest in thread 4
[junit] Tests run: 1, Failures: 0, Errors: 0, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 
1.228 sec, Thread: 4, Class: org.apache.zookeeper.test.ZooKeeperQuotaTest
[junit] Running org.apache.zookeeper.util.PemReaderTest in thread 4
[junit] Tests run: 64, Failures: 0, Errors: 0, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 
5.087 sec, Thread: 4, Class: org.apache.zookeeper.util.PemReaderTest
[junit] Running org.apache.jute.BinaryInputArchiveTest in thread 4
[junit] Tests run: 7, Failures: 0, Errors: 0, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 
0.234 sec, Thread: 4, Class: org.apache.jute.BinaryInputArchiveTest
[junit] Tests run: 8, Failures: 0, Errors: 0, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 
35.084 sec, Thread: 3, Class: org.apache.zookeeper.test.WatcherTest
[junit] Tests run: 2, Failures: 0, Errors: 0, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 
184.077 sec, Thread: 1, Class: org.apache.zookeeper.test.RestoreCommittedLogTest
[junit] Running org.apache.zookeeper.test.ReconfigTest in thread 2
[junit] Tests run: 1, Failures: 0, Errors: 1, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 0 
sec, Thread: 2, Class: 

ZooKeeper-trunk - Build # 616 - Still Failing

[Apache Jenkins Server]

See https://builds.apache.org/job/ZooKeeper-trunk/616/

###
## LAST 60 LINES OF THE CONSOLE 
###
[...truncated 190.53 KB...]
[junit] Running org.apache.zookeeper.test.SessionTest in thread 4
[junit] Tests run: 6, Failures: 0, Errors: 0, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 
15.747 sec, Thread: 4, Class: org.apache.zookeeper.test.SessionTest
[junit] Running org.apache.zookeeper.test.SessionTimeoutTest in thread 4
[junit] Tests run: 5, Failures: 0, Errors: 0, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 
1.777 sec, Thread: 4, Class: org.apache.zookeeper.test.SessionTimeoutTest
[junit] Running org.apache.zookeeper.test.SessionTrackerCheckTest in thread 
4
[junit] Tests run: 2, Failures: 0, Errors: 0, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 
0.103 sec, Thread: 4, Class: org.apache.zookeeper.test.SessionTrackerCheckTest
[junit] Running org.apache.zookeeper.test.SessionUpgradeTest in thread 4
[junit] Tests run: 4, Failures: 0, Errors: 0, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 
5.602 sec, Thread: 4, Class: org.apache.zookeeper.test.SessionUpgradeTest
[junit] Running org.apache.zookeeper.test.StandaloneTest in thread 4
[junit] Tests run: 4, Failures: 0, Errors: 0, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 
3.15 sec, Thread: 4, Class: org.apache.zookeeper.test.StandaloneTest
[junit] Running org.apache.zookeeper.test.StatTest in thread 4
[junit] Tests run: 4, Failures: 0, Errors: 0, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 
1.181 sec, Thread: 4, Class: org.apache.zookeeper.test.StatTest
[junit] Running org.apache.zookeeper.test.StaticHostProviderTest in thread 4
[junit] Tests run: 26, Failures: 0, Errors: 0, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 
2.18 sec, Thread: 4, Class: org.apache.zookeeper.test.StaticHostProviderTest
[junit] Running org.apache.zookeeper.test.StringUtilTest in thread 4
[junit] Tests run: 1, Failures: 0, Errors: 0, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 
0.084 sec, Thread: 4, Class: org.apache.zookeeper.test.StringUtilTest
[junit] Running org.apache.zookeeper.test.SyncCallTest in thread 4
[junit] Tests run: 1, Failures: 0, Errors: 0, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 
0.815 sec, Thread: 4, Class: org.apache.zookeeper.test.SyncCallTest
[junit] Running org.apache.zookeeper.test.TruncateTest in thread 4
[junit] Tests run: 3, Failures: 0, Errors: 0, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 
3.784 sec, Thread: 4, Class: org.apache.zookeeper.test.TruncateTest
[junit] Running org.apache.zookeeper.test.WatchEventWhenAutoResetTest in 
thread 4
[junit] Tests run: 109, Failures: 0, Errors: 0, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 
305.49 sec, Thread: 2, Class: org.apache.zookeeper.test.NettyNettySuiteTest
[junit] Tests run: 4, Failures: 0, Errors: 0, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 
12.985 sec, Thread: 4, Class: 
org.apache.zookeeper.test.WatchEventWhenAutoResetTest
[junit] Running org.apache.zookeeper.test.WatchedEventTest in thread 2
[junit] Tests run: 4, Failures: 0, Errors: 0, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 
0.08 sec, Thread: 2, Class: org.apache.zookeeper.test.WatchedEventTest
[junit] Running org.apache.zookeeper.test.WatcherFuncTest in thread 4
[junit] Running org.apache.zookeeper.test.WatcherTest in thread 2
[junit] Tests run: 6, Failures: 0, Errors: 0, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 
2.322 sec, Thread: 4, Class: org.apache.zookeeper.test.WatcherFuncTest
[junit] Running org.apache.zookeeper.test.X509AuthTest in thread 4
[junit] Tests run: 3, Failures: 0, Errors: 0, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 
0.108 sec, Thread: 4, Class: org.apache.zookeeper.test.X509AuthTest
[junit] Running org.apache.zookeeper.test.ZkDatabaseCorruptionTest in 
thread 4
[junit] Tests run: 2, Failures: 0, Errors: 0, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 
5.484 sec, Thread: 4, Class: org.apache.zookeeper.test.ZkDatabaseCorruptionTest
[junit] Running org.apache.zookeeper.test.ZooKeeperQuotaTest in thread 4
[junit] Tests run: 1, Failures: 0, Errors: 0, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 
0.891 sec, Thread: 4, Class: org.apache.zookeeper.test.ZooKeeperQuotaTest
[junit] Running org.apache.zookeeper.util.PemReaderTest in thread 4
[junit] Tests run: 64, Failures: 0, Errors: 0, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 
3.156 sec, Thread: 4, Class: org.apache.zookeeper.util.PemReaderTest
[junit] Running org.apache.jute.BinaryInputArchiveTest in thread 4
[junit] Tests run: 7, Failures: 0, Errors: 0, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 
0.176 sec, Thread: 4, Class: org.apache.jute.BinaryInputArchiveTest
[junit] Tests run: 8, Failures: 0, Errors: 0, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 
31.006 sec, Thread: 2, Class: org.apache.zookeeper.test.WatcherTest
[junit] Tests run: 109, Failures: 0, Errors: 0, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 
335.535 sec, Thread: 1, Class: org.apache.zookeeper.test.NioNettySuiteTest
[junit] Tests run: 13, Failures: 0, Errors: 0, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 
244.212 sec, Thread: 3, Class: org.apache.zookeeper.test.ReconfigTest

fail.build.on.test.failure:

Re: Intellij Idea warning as error with -Xdoclint

[Enrico Olivelli]

Il lun 15 lug 2019, 13:53 Andor Molnar  ha scritto:

> Hi Enrico,
>
> This is still an issue for me in IDEA:
>
> Javadoc problems found in zookeeper-jute and zookeeper-server projects, so
> the build eventually fails. Strange thing is that running maven from
> command line doesn’t show any warning nor error.
>
> From javac params -Werror and -Xdoclint I think IDEA’s behaviour is
> correct.
>
> Most warning messages in IDEA are about missing javadoc comments, so
> changing it to "-Xdoclint:-missing” solves the problem.
>

I can try to understand better.
If I understand correctly your point is that apparently Idea is working as
expected but Maven not and this is not good because CI runs with Maven.

I will be back with news.
Hopefully we can fix javadocs and have a reliable way to detect issues on
docs on CI/precommit/nightly

Enrico


> Regards,
> Andor
>
>
>
>
> > On 2019. Jun 20., at 20:28, Andor Molnar  wrote:
> >
> > Done. #983 merged, problem gone.
> > Thanks maoling!
> >
> > Andor
> >
> >
> >
> >> On 2019. Jun 20., at 15:43, maoling  wrote:
> >>
> >> I also noticed this when running UT with IDEA.may we can merge this PR:
> >> https://github.com/apache/zookeeper/pull/988
> >> Or this one: https://github.com/apache/zookeeper/pull/983 to remove
> that warning.
> >>
> >> 发送自 Windows 10 版邮件应用
> >>
> >> 发件人: Andor Molnar
> >> 发送时间: 2019年6月20日 5:46
> >> 收件人: DevZooKeeper
> >> 主题: Intellij Idea warning as error with -Xdoclint
> >>
> >>
> >> Hi Enrico,
> >>
> >> I have the following error message in Idea since -Xdoclint is enabled
> in the main pom.xml file:
> >>
> >>
> /Users/andormolnar/git/my-zookeeper/zookeeper-jute/src/main/java/org/apache/jute/Utils.java
> >> Error:(194, 15) java: @param name not found
> >> Error:(231, 15) java: @param name not found
> >>
> >> Strange that I don’t see the same warnings in console when running ‘mvn
> install’.
> >> I confirm that removing “-Xdoclint” (or fixing javadoc issues) solves
> the problem.
> >>
> >> Andor
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
>
>

Jenkins build is back to stable : zookeeper-master-maven-jdk12 #42

[Apache Jenkins Server]

See 

Re: Re: Re: Re: Clean up the all the checkstyle violations in the zookeeper-server module

[Enrico Olivelli]

Il lun 15 lug 2019, 09:14 Justin Ling Mao  ha
scritto:

> - any advance for the discussion???- any objections about these two
> things: 1.only clean the main-module:zookeeper-server;


Please add jute and Prometheus module

2.using the google's checkstyle_style?-


Works for me

> who will head it up?  how about me？
>

Sure! Go for it. Thanks

Enrico

>
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "Justin Ling Mao" 
> To: "dev" 
> Subject: Re: Re: Re: Clean up the all the checkstyle violations in the
> zookeeper-server module
> Date: 2019-07-07 15:56
>
> 1.--->“we'd better first create an umbrella issue named "Enable checkstyle
> rules" or sth”I had created ZOOKEEPER-3431 previously, and we can create a
> series of sub-tasks under it.
> 2.I think we still have two things which should be discussed:  2.1
> Currently, we only need to enforce the checkstyle violations check in the
> main-module:zookeeper-server, not included other modules?  IMO, because
> the zookeeper-contrib, zookeeper-recipes are now not well-maintained.
> and some violations in the zookeeper-jute are auto-generated. so focusing
> on zookeeper-server is enough?
>   2.2 What checkstyle template we will pick up? Now we have three
> options:  A:[google_style](
> https://checkstyle.sourceforge.io/google_style.html)
> B:[bookkeeper_style] (
> https://github.com/apache/bookkeeper/blob/master/buildtools/src/main/resources/bookkeeper/checkstyle.xml)
> C:[hbase_style](
> https://github.com/apache/hbase/blob/master/hbase-checkstyle/src/main/resources/hbase/checkstyle.xml)
> Which one will we choose?
>
>
> - Original Message -
> From: Enrico Olivelli 
> To: dev@zookeeper.apache.org
> Cc: maoling199210...@sina.com
> Subject: Re: Re: Clean up the all the checkstyle violations in the
> zookeeper-server module
> Date: 2019-07-07 15:13
>
> Il dom 7 lug 2019, 01:29 Zili Chen  ha scritto:
> > Justin & Enrico,
> >
> > Receiving no opposition on this proposal, we could regard it as
> > a consensus. According to bookkeeper#230 we'd better first create
> > an umbrella issue named "Enable checkstyle rules" or sth. Under
> > there we can finally decide the checkstyle configuration and
> > start sub-tasks enabling per package.
> >
> > For keeping current checkstyle, I'd like to pick up that it's
> > possible that we remain the current simple config for all pkgs,
> > adding a config said copied from bookkeeper named
> > "strict-checkstyle.xml", enabling per pkg, which contains @author
> > tags and rules in simple config. Once we enabling the strict one
> > for all pkgs. We can merge two configs into one.
> >
> +1 please go ahead
> Enrico
> > Best,
> > tison.
> >
> >
> > Enrico Olivelli  于2019年7月6日周六 下午8:20写道：
> >
> > > Justin,
> > > This is how we did it in Bookkeeper, we enabled checkstyle only for
> group
> > > of packages in the main module (the biggest one, bookkeeper-server)
> > >
> > > https://github.com/apache/bookkeeper/issues/230
> > >
> > > I suggest using that checkstyle config, I feel we won't have so many
> > > violations.
> > >
> > > We can keep current checkstyle invokation that checks for @author tags
> > as a
> > > separate 'execution' of the plugin with a specific checkstyle file (as
> > you
> > > already said)
> > >
> > > I am happy to help, thank you for driving this effort
> > >
> > > Enrico
> > >
> > >
> > > Il sab 6 lug 2019, 11:33 Justin Ling Mao 
> ha
> > > scritto:
> > >
> > > > - 1.It seems that we had reached a consensus to work on this.- 2.I
> also
> > > > agree on the way: fix one package at a time, then another.- 3.Now Let
> > us
> > > > discuss some details:- 3.1 how to make the checkstyle only check
> > the
> > > > package we specify? I found this:  URL:
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://stackoverflow.com/questions/26455174/only-enable-some-checks-for-certain-inner-package
> > > > @Olivelli Could you give me more your insight?- 3.2 What
> rules
> > > will
> > > > we init in the checkstyle.xml?   3.2.1 - I also think the rules
> > from
> > > > the hbase is too strict which will cause too many,many violations.
> > > >  3.2.2 - apply the "Google's Java Style Checkstyle Coverage" is a
> good
> > > > option? which seems to be more simplify and more suitable for us?
> > > >  URL:https://checkstyle.sourceforge.io/google_style.html
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > - Original Message -
> > > > From: Andor Molnar 
> > > > To: DevZooKeeper 
> > > > Subject: Re: Clean up the all the checkstyle violations in the
> > > > zookeeper-server module
> > > > Date: 2019-07-02 13:22
> > > >
> > > > Yes. That way we only need to fix one package at a time.
> > > > Andor
> > > > On Mon, Jul 1, 2019 at 4:10 PM Zili Chen 
> wrote:
> > > > > Hi Andor,
> > > > >
> > > > > To be exact, "iterations" means we define the original rules
> > > > > in checkstyle configuration at once and turn them on one package
> > > > > after another, so iterations. Is it correct?
> > > > >
> > > > > Best,
> > > > > tison.
> > > > >
> > > 

Jenkins build became unstable: zookeeper-master-maven-jdk11 #44

[Apache Jenkins Server]

See 

Jenkins build is still unstable: zookeeper-master-maven-jdk12 #41

[Apache Jenkins Server]

See 

Re: Time to think about a 3.6.0 release?

[Andor Molnar]

Hi maoling,

I reformatted your original message, because it was pretty hard to read (all in 
a single line) after Apache converted into plain text. Would you please try to 
send plain text messages by default to avoid the conversion? It might help.

Answers inline.


> On 2019. Jul 15., at 11:54, Justin Ling Mao  wrote:
> 
> - 1.Since the 3.5.5 has just released in May. we still need some time to 
> collect the users' feedback.we cannot make sure the release time of 3.6.0? 
> Giving the experience from the previous release history:)


I don’t feel it too fast. I’m happy to see people willing to work on releases 
and I believe it’s a good thing to speed up ZooKeeper releases. 4 years release 
cycle is not something that we should follow in the future.

The discussion about the next major release is just started and doesn’t mean we 
have to cut tomorrow. Talk about it. Your list of upcoming patches are more 
than welcome, we need to discuss where to fit them.

Friends@Facebook are also working hard to get patches into 3.6.0. We need to 
synchronize with all contributors.


> - 2.please Let me share some my thoughts, and the work in progress will be 
> arriving into 3.6.0. Plz correct me if I got something wrong.

Sure. Awesome list.


> --P0  
>   
> - Support the backend store engine:LMDB. this work needs a very detailed 
> proposal which I will send to the community for being discussed fully.

I think this should go into 4.0.0 instead if it’s only is design phase 
currently. This is probably true for the rest of patches too: everything which 
already has a PR or close to it can fit into 3.6.0, others should go to 4.0.0.





> - Add a complete backup mechanism for zookeeper internal(PR-917) which I will 
> sharp it this week.
> - A very powerful benchmark tool(PR-1011) which will be available within 
> these two week.
> - improve the performance of read/write to have the distinct advantages 
> compared to etcd v3.4 which will be released soon.
> - To strengthen the quota feature(PR-934,PR-936,PR-938) and implement the 
> throughout quota.
> - To strengthen the implements of TTL node(PR-1010)
> - Add some new very useful CLIs: quorumInfo, watch .etc
> - Observe and strengthen the new metric system continuously.
> --P1  
>
> - strength the docs, especially about the c client, local session, 
> security(TLS),ZAB protocol .etc
> - introduce some chaos, fuzzy tests and tools to hit and check the zk.
> - Clean up the all the checkstyle violations in the zookeeper-server 
> module(ZOOKEEPER-3431)
> - P2— 
> 
> - Debug mode feature. Look at an example of redis
> - the tracing feature(PR-994). if having another time, integrating with 
> opentracing sounds a very good idea.
> - replace jute with thrift or PB may be put into the 4.0.0 when wanting to 
> break the backward compatibility? And at the 4.0.0, implementing the restful 
> api is also a  very good idea.
> 

Thanks,
Andor


> 
> 
> - Original Message -
> From: Fangmin Lv 
> To: dev@zookeeper.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Time to think about a 3.6.0 release?
> Date: 2019-06-26 07:33
> 
> It's great to have a 3.6.0 release, currently all the FB contributed
> features has been running inside FB for more than a month, so it
> should be stable enough for community to use.
> Also I agreed with Patrick's point to review all flags and consider to turn
> on by default.
> For the pending PRs, the following might be higher priority and would be
> nice to include in the 3.6.0 release:
> * ZOOKEEPER-3356: Implement advanced Netty flow control based on feedback
> from ZK to avoid OOM issue
> * ZOOKEEPER-3145: Avoid watch missing issue due to stale pzxid when
> replaying CloseSession txn with fuzzy snapshot
> * ZOOKEEPER-3240: Close socket on Learner shutdown to avoid dangling socket
> Thanks,
> Fangmin
> On Sat, Jun 15, 2019 at 9:21 AM Patrick Hunt  wrote:
>> Good idea. Agree on including anything we've postponed to a new cycle - the
>> patch from mapr is an obvious one to consider.
>> 
>> We should also look at things we've disabled by default and consider
>> whether we can turn them on by default. If not why not, and what can we do
>> to fix this in a subsequent release.
>> 
>> Have we deprecated anything that we should now remove?
>> 
>> Also a good time to review the state of Java versions and make changes wrt
>> supported versions and so forth.
>> 
>> There was a proposal to remove contribs, or at least consider the ones that
>> are still valuable vs moving some out. We should do that as well.
>> 
>> Regards,
>> 
>> Patrick
>> 
>> On Sat, Jun 15, 2019 at 9:02 AM Jordan Zimmerman <
>> jor...@jordanzimmerman.com>
>> wrote:
>> 
>>> On Persistent/Recursive watches: I’m willing to rebase, etc 

Re: Re: Time to think about a 3.6.0 release?

[Enrico Olivelli]

Justin,
I think that current master has already plenty of new features and it is
worth to start thinking to a release.
The more with add code the more we add risk.

The point of this thread is more about 'stop adding new stuff, complete
ongoing work and start a rampdown phase', it is not "cut a release right
now"

As far as I know current master is very different from branch 3.5,
expecially on server side code, lots of feature came in and stalled on
master branch for months or even years,
so feedback from 3.5 is useful but not so blocker

We should make current master stable

IMHO the recipe for a great release is:
1) enough stuff committed to the release branch sothat it is worth to cut a
release
2) code in good shape: tests are passing, automatic checks are passing
(spotbugs, rat...)
3) licensing stuff is okay
4)  upgrade instructions and changelog about breaking changes/new
beheaviours are complete
5) CI is doing well
6) consensus of the community about the release


Hopefully now that we got out of the 3.5-BETA  problem and we are stable we
can think about a time based release schedule, if a feature can't be
delivered on a release it won't pass so much time for a new release, say
3-4 months

I don't know how many companies are using "current master" (or something
like that) in production, I feel that running 3.5 does not tell very much
about the stability of current 3.6

So my plan would be:
- merge pending pull requests that are ready
- stabilize the codebase  (no more BLOCKER issues for the release)
- start release process

I guess that if we start now we can have a 3.6 in September

Enrico




Il lun 15 lug 2019, 11:55 Justin Ling Mao  ha
scritto:

> - 1.Since the 3.5.5 has just released in May. we still need some time to
> collect the users' feedback.we cannot make sure the release time of 3.6.0?
> Giving the experience from the previous release history:)- 2.please Let me
> share some my thoughts, and the work in progress will be arriving into
> 3.6.0. Plz correct me if I got something wrong.
>  
> --P0
>- Support the backend store engine:LMDB. this work needs a very detailed
> proposal which I will send to the community for being discussed fully.
>  - Add a complete backup mechanism for zookeeper internal(PR-917) which I
> will sharp it this week. - A very powerful benchmark tool(PR-1011)
> which will be available within these two week. - improve the
> performance of read/write to have the distinct advantages compared to etcd
> v3.4 which will be released soon. - To strengthen the quota
> feature(PR-934,PR-936,PR-938) and implement the throughout quota. - To
> strengthen the implements of TTL node(PR-1010) - Add some new very
> useful CLIs: quorumInfo, watch .etc - Observe and strengthen the new
> metric system continuously.
>  
> --P1
>- strength the docs, especially about the c client, local session,
> security(TLS),ZAB protocol .etc - introduce some chaos, fuzzy tests and
> tools to hit and check the zk. - Clean up the all the checkstyle
> violations in the zookeeper-server module(ZOOKEEPER-3431)
>  -
> P2-- -
> Debug mode feature. Look at an example of redis - the tracing
> feature(PR-994). if having another time, integrating with opentracing
> sounds a very good idea. - replace jute with thrift or PB may be put
> into the 4.0.0 when wanting to break the backward compatibility? And at the
> 4.0.0, implementing the restful api is also a  very good idea.
>
>
>
> - Original Message -
> From: Fangmin Lv 
> To: dev@zookeeper.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Time to think about a 3.6.0 release?
> Date: 2019-06-26 07:33
>
> It's great to have a 3.6.0 release, currently all the FB contributed
> features has been running inside FB for more than a month, so it
> should be stable enough for community to use.
> Also I agreed with Patrick's point to review all flags and consider to turn
> on by default.
> For the pending PRs, the following might be higher priority and would be
> nice to include in the 3.6.0 release:
> * ZOOKEEPER-3356: Implement advanced Netty flow control based on feedback
> from ZK to avoid OOM issue
> * ZOOKEEPER-3145: Avoid watch missing issue due to stale pzxid when
> replaying CloseSession txn with fuzzy snapshot
> * ZOOKEEPER-3240: Close socket on Learner shutdown to avoid dangling socket
> Thanks,
> Fangmin
> On Sat, Jun 15, 2019 at 9:21 AM Patrick Hunt  wrote:
> > Good idea. Agree on including anything we've postponed to a new cycle -
> the
> > patch from mapr is an obvious one to consider.
> >
> > We should also look at things we've disabled by default and consider
> > whether we can turn them on by default. If not why 

Re: Intellij Idea warning as error with -Xdoclint

[Andor Molnar]

Hi Enrico,

This is still an issue for me in IDEA:

Javadoc problems found in zookeeper-jute and zookeeper-server projects, so the 
build eventually fails. Strange thing is that running maven from command line 
doesn’t show any warning nor error.

From javac params -Werror and -Xdoclint I think IDEA’s behaviour is correct.

Most warning messages in IDEA are about missing javadoc comments, so changing 
it to "-Xdoclint:-missing” solves the problem.

Regards,
Andor




> On 2019. Jun 20., at 20:28, Andor Molnar  wrote:
> 
> Done. #983 merged, problem gone.
> Thanks maoling!
> 
> Andor
> 
> 
> 
>> On 2019. Jun 20., at 15:43, maoling  wrote:
>> 
>> I also noticed this when running UT with IDEA.may we can merge this PR: 
>> https://github.com/apache/zookeeper/pull/988
>> Or this one: https://github.com/apache/zookeeper/pull/983 to remove that 
>> warning.
>> 
>> 发送自 Windows 10 版邮件应用
>> 
>> 发件人: Andor Molnar
>> 发送时间: 2019年6月20日 5:46
>> 收件人: DevZooKeeper
>> 主题: Intellij Idea warning as error with -Xdoclint
>> 
>> 
>> Hi Enrico,
>> 
>> I have the following error message in Idea since -Xdoclint is enabled in the 
>> main pom.xml file:
>> 
>> /Users/andormolnar/git/my-zookeeper/zookeeper-jute/src/main/java/org/apache/jute/Utils.java
>> Error:(194, 15) java: @param name not found
>> Error:(231, 15) java: @param name not found
>> 
>> Strange that I don’t see the same warnings in console when running ‘mvn 
>> install’.
>> I confirm that removing “-Xdoclint” (or fixing javadoc issues) solves the 
>> problem.
>> 
>> Andor
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
> 

Re: Re: Time to think about a 3.6.0 release?

[Justin Ling Mao]

- 1.Since the 3.5.5 has just released in May. we still need some time to 
collect the users' feedback.we cannot make sure the release time of 3.6.0? 
Giving the experience from the previous release history:)- 2.please Let me 
share some my thoughts, and the work in progress will be arriving into 3.6.0. 
Plz correct me if I got something wrong. 
--P0
 - Support the backend store engine:LMDB. this work needs a very detailed 
proposal which I will send to the community for being discussed fully. - 
Add a complete backup mechanism for zookeeper internal(PR-917) which I will 
sharp it this week. - A very powerful benchmark tool(PR-1011) which will be 
available within these two week. - improve the performance of read/write to 
have the distinct advantages compared to etcd v3.4 which will be released soon. 
- To strengthen the quota feature(PR-934,PR-936,PR-938) and implement the 
throughout quota. - To strengthen the implements of TTL node(PR-1010) - 
Add some new very useful CLIs: quorumInfo, watch .etc - Observe and 
strengthen the new metric system continuously. 
--P1
 - strength the docs, especially about the c client, local session, 
security(TLS),ZAB protocol .etc - introduce some chaos, fuzzy tests and 
tools to hit and check the zk. - Clean up the all the checkstyle violations 
in the zookeeper-server module(ZOOKEEPER-3431) 
- 
P2-- - 
Debug mode feature. Look at an example of redis - the tracing 
feature(PR-994). if having another time, integrating with opentracing sounds a 
very good idea. - replace jute with thrift or PB may be put into the 4.0.0 
when wanting to break the backward compatibility? And at the 4.0.0, 
implementing the restful api is also a  very good idea.



- Original Message -
From: Fangmin Lv 
To: dev@zookeeper.apache.org
Subject: Re: Time to think about a 3.6.0 release?
Date: 2019-06-26 07:33

It's great to have a 3.6.0 release, currently all the FB contributed
features has been running inside FB for more than a month, so it
should be stable enough for community to use.
Also I agreed with Patrick's point to review all flags and consider to turn
on by default.
For the pending PRs, the following might be higher priority and would be
nice to include in the 3.6.0 release:
* ZOOKEEPER-3356: Implement advanced Netty flow control based on feedback
from ZK to avoid OOM issue
* ZOOKEEPER-3145: Avoid watch missing issue due to stale pzxid when
replaying CloseSession txn with fuzzy snapshot
* ZOOKEEPER-3240: Close socket on Learner shutdown to avoid dangling socket
Thanks,
Fangmin
On Sat, Jun 15, 2019 at 9:21 AM Patrick Hunt  wrote:
> Good idea. Agree on including anything we've postponed to a new cycle - the
> patch from mapr is an obvious one to consider.
>
> We should also look at things we've disabled by default and consider
> whether we can turn them on by default. If not why not, and what can we do
> to fix this in a subsequent release.
>
> Have we deprecated anything that we should now remove?
>
> Also a good time to review the state of Java versions and make changes wrt
> supported versions and so forth.
>
> There was a proposal to remove contribs, or at least consider the ones that
> are still valuable vs moving some out. We should do that as well.
>
> Regards,
>
> Patrick
>
> On Sat, Jun 15, 2019 at 9:02 AM Jordan Zimmerman <
> jor...@jordanzimmerman.com>
> wrote:
>
> > On Persistent/Recursive watches: I’m willing to rebase, etc if there’s
> > confidence it will be merged.
> >
> > 
> > Jordan Zimmerman
> >
> > > On Jun 15, 2019, at 10:59 AM, Andor Molnar  >
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi Enrico!
> > >
> > > Very good point, I entirely support the idea.
> > >
> > > Question to Friends@Facebook and Twitter contributors: how many
> > outstanding
> > > Jiras/PRs do you have which you would like to see in 3.6?
> > >
> > > I'd also like to highlight the long outstanding PR from Mapr:
> > > https://github.com/apache/zookeeper/pull/730
> > >
> > > And some great new features which are still looking for to be merged:
> > > - Persistent recursive watchers:
> > > https://github.com/apache/zookeeper/pull/136
> > > - Enforce client auth: https://github.com/apache/zookeeper/pull/118
> > > - Slow operation log
> > > - Jetty port unification
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > Andor
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >> On Sat, Jun 15, 2019 at 1:31 PM Enrico Olivelli 
> > wrote:
> > >>
> > >> Hi Zookeepers !
> > >> I checked on JIRA and it seems that master in good shape, no real
> > blockers
> > >> that mine the stability of the code.
> > >>
> > >> We have plenty of cool pull requests almost ready to be merged 

Re: Re: Re: Re: Clean up the all the checkstyle violations in the zookeeper-server module

[Justin Ling Mao]

- any advance for the discussion???- any objections about these two things: 
1.only clean the main-module:zookeeper-server;  2.using the google's 
checkstyle_style?- who will head it up?  how about me？


- Original Message -
From: "Justin Ling Mao" 
To: "dev" 
Subject: Re: Re: Re: Clean up the all the checkstyle violations in the 
zookeeper-server module
Date: 2019-07-07 15:56

1.--->“we'd better first create an umbrella issue named "Enable checkstyle 
rules" or sth”I had created ZOOKEEPER-3431 previously, and we can create a 
series of sub-tasks under it.
2.I think we still have two things which should be discussed:  2.1 Currently, 
we only need to enforce the checkstyle violations check in the 
main-module:zookeeper-server, not included other modules?  IMO, because the 
zookeeper-contrib, zookeeper-recipes are now not well-maintained.  and some 
violations in the zookeeper-jute are auto-generated. so focusing on 
zookeeper-server is enough?
  2.2 What checkstyle template we will pick up? Now we have three options:  
A:[google_style](https://checkstyle.sourceforge.io/google_style.html)  
B:[bookkeeper_style] 
(https://github.com/apache/bookkeeper/blob/master/buildtools/src/main/resources/bookkeeper/checkstyle.xml)
  
C:[hbase_style](https://github.com/apache/hbase/blob/master/hbase-checkstyle/src/main/resources/hbase/checkstyle.xml)
  Which one will we choose?


- Original Message -
From: Enrico Olivelli 
To: dev@zookeeper.apache.org
Cc: maoling199210...@sina.com
Subject: Re: Re: Clean up the all the checkstyle violations in the 
zookeeper-server module
Date: 2019-07-07 15:13

Il dom 7 lug 2019, 01:29 Zili Chen  ha scritto:
> Justin & Enrico,
>
> Receiving no opposition on this proposal, we could regard it as
> a consensus. According to bookkeeper#230 we'd better first create
> an umbrella issue named "Enable checkstyle rules" or sth. Under
> there we can finally decide the checkstyle configuration and
> start sub-tasks enabling per package.
>
> For keeping current checkstyle, I'd like to pick up that it's
> possible that we remain the current simple config for all pkgs,
> adding a config said copied from bookkeeper named
> "strict-checkstyle.xml", enabling per pkg, which contains @author
> tags and rules in simple config. Once we enabling the strict one
> for all pkgs. We can merge two configs into one.
>
+1 please go ahead
Enrico
> Best,
> tison.
>
>
> Enrico Olivelli  于2019年7月6日周六 下午8:20写道：
>
> > Justin,
> > This is how we did it in Bookkeeper, we enabled checkstyle only for group
> > of packages in the main module (the biggest one, bookkeeper-server)
> >
> > https://github.com/apache/bookkeeper/issues/230
> >
> > I suggest using that checkstyle config, I feel we won't have so many
> > violations.
> >
> > We can keep current checkstyle invokation that checks for @author tags
> as a
> > separate 'execution' of the plugin with a specific checkstyle file (as
> you
> > already said)
> >
> > I am happy to help, thank you for driving this effort
> >
> > Enrico
> >
> >
> > Il sab 6 lug 2019, 11:33 Justin Ling Mao  ha
> > scritto:
> >
> > > - 1.It seems that we had reached a consensus to work on this.- 2.I also
> > > agree on the way: fix one package at a time, then another.- 3.Now Let
> us
> > > discuss some details:- 3.1 how to make the checkstyle only check
> the
> > > package we specify? I found this:  URL:
> > >
> >
> https://stackoverflow.com/questions/26455174/only-enable-some-checks-for-certain-inner-package
> > > @Olivelli Could you give me more your insight?- 3.2 What rules
> > will
> > > we init in the checkstyle.xml?   3.2.1 - I also think the rules
> from
> > > the hbase is too strict which will cause too many,many violations.
> > >  3.2.2 - apply the "Google's Java Style Checkstyle Coverage" is a good
> > > option? which seems to be more simplify and more suitable for us?
> > >  URL:https://checkstyle.sourceforge.io/google_style.html
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > - Original Message -
> > > From: Andor Molnar 
> > > To: DevZooKeeper 
> > > Subject: Re: Clean up the all the checkstyle violations in the
> > > zookeeper-server module
> > > Date: 2019-07-02 13:22
> > >
> > > Yes. That way we only need to fix one package at a time.
> > > Andor
> > > On Mon, Jul 1, 2019 at 4:10 PM Zili Chen  wrote:
> > > > Hi Andor,
> > > >
> > > > To be exact, "iterations" means we define the original rules
> > > > in checkstyle configuration at once and turn them on one package
> > > > after another, so iterations. Is it correct?
> > > >
> > > > Best,
> > > > tison.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Andor Molnar  于2019年7月1日周一 下午9:09写道：
> > > >
> > > > > I like the idea of doing this in iterations.
> > > > >
> > > > > Andor
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > > On 2019. Jun 29., at 8:35, Zili Chen 
> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > A solution could be, we remains current simple configuration
> > > > > > and introduce a so-called "strict-checkstyle.xml" and