Re: [Request For Review] ZOOKEEPER-3474 a.k.a GH-1028

2019-08-23 Thread Zili Chen
FYI ZOOKEEPER-3517[1][2]. We still have one invocation of the checkstyle plugin per module. The strategy is that we turn on the strict one at project level while the simple one at contrib module level as an override. This is an invert from what we previously did. Best, tison. [1]

Re: [Request For Review] ZOOKEEPER-3474 a.k.a GH-1028

2019-08-17 Thread Enrico Olivelli
Il dom 18 ago 2019, 03:26 Zili Chen ha scritto: > Of course I volunteer to do. > Great > > To clarify the process, we want to merge checkstyle-strict.xml into > checkstyle.xml and thus turn on rules in current checkstyle-strict.xml > on project level, while also removing configurations in

Re: [Request For Review] ZOOKEEPER-3474 a.k.a GH-1028

2019-08-17 Thread Zili Chen
Of course I volunteer to do. To clarify the process, we want to merge checkstyle-strict.xml into checkstyle.xml and thus turn on rules in current checkstyle-strict.xml on project level, while also removing configurations in plugins field of pom.xml in submodules. Is this process expected? Best,

Re: [Request For Review] ZOOKEEPER-3474 a.k.a GH-1028

2019-08-17 Thread Enrico Olivelli
We have merged this useful work. Now we have to merge the two checkstyle files/plugin executions into only one. We have one project wide configuration (all projects, contrib...) that check for '@author' and the new one that is a full checkstyle run. Tison, do you want to complete the work?

Re: [Request For Review] ZOOKEEPER-3474 a.k.a GH-1028

2019-08-11 Thread Zili Chen
Hi, A quick update on this thread. ZOOKEEPER-3475 a.k.a GH-1049[1] has been sent for review. It contains commits enabling checkstyle configuration on zookeeper-server module per package, as described above. Best, tison. [1] https://github.com/apache/zookeeper/pull/1049 Enrico Olivelli

Re: [Request For Review] ZOOKEEPER-3474 a.k.a GH-1028

2019-08-09 Thread Enrico Olivelli
Il giorno ven 9 ago 2019 alle ore 16:45 Zili Chen ha scritto: > Hi Enrico, > > It happens my original schedule on this weekend canceled so that > I can make progress on this thread the next two days. > > From my side I would prefer multiple self-contained commits(see > below) when sending pull

Re: [Request For Review] ZOOKEEPER-3474 a.k.a GH-1028

2019-08-09 Thread Zili Chen
Hi Enrico, It happens my original schedule on this weekend canceled so that I can make progress on this thread the next two days. >From my side I would prefer multiple self-contained commits(see below) when sending pull requests. It would helps reviews and we can always squash and merge them.

Re: [Request For Review] ZOOKEEPER-3474 a.k.a GH-1028

2019-08-09 Thread Enrico Olivelli
It is better that we preserve variable names, method names, class names because we could fall into bad troubles in case of cherry picks. We can comment out the rules that would force us to break such kind of 'compatibility' Fangmin and Micheal, you are the maintainers of two major forks, do you

Re: [Request For Review] ZOOKEEPER-3474 a.k.a GH-1028

2019-08-08 Thread Michael Han
hi tison, that sounds good to me, thanks On Thu, Aug 8, 2019 at 6:40 PM Zili Chen wrote: > Hi Michael, > > After thinking about it, I think enable checkstyle configuration > is only about formatting. And I would make sure that there is no > refactor. And forked repo maintainers can rebase their

Re: [Request For Review] ZOOKEEPER-3474 a.k.a GH-1028

2019-08-08 Thread Zili Chen
Hi Michael, After thinking about it, I think enable checkstyle configuration is only about formatting. And I would make sure that there is no refactor. And forked repo maintainers can rebase their work on the new master just by manually applying patches. If the forked repo has been quite diverged

Re: [Request For Review] ZOOKEEPER-3474 a.k.a GH-1028

2019-08-07 Thread Zili Chen
@Michael FYI, it is possible by properly setting and updating suppressing rules. Best, tison. Michael Han 于2019年8月8日周四 上午9:12写道: > I think a good approach is doing this incrementally. Doing this all at once > over entire server code base will make life much harder for those who > maintain

Re: [Request For Review] ZOOKEEPER-3474 a.k.a GH-1028

2019-08-07 Thread Michael Han
I think a good approach is doing this incrementally. Doing this all at once over entire server code base will make life much harder for those who maintain their own ZooKeeper forks and has internal patches, and the change itself will be impossible to review (even though most changes are

Re: [Request For Review] ZOOKEEPER-3474 a.k.a GH-1028

2019-08-05 Thread Zili Chen
>I see some javadoc related issues in your gist, >didn't we disable that rule ? JavadocType The failures reported are "Missing javadoc", and what we disabled is "Empty javadoc". Fair enough to disable "Missing javadoc" for now and filed into ZOOKEEPER-3469 since a empty javadoc is also a

Re: [Request For Review] ZOOKEEPER-3474 a.k.a GH-1028

2019-08-05 Thread Enrico Olivelli
Il giorno mar 6 ago 2019 alle ore 03:51 Zili Chen ha scritto: > Hi Enrico, > > Thanks for your participant! > > Running after turn on checkstyle on zookeeper-server > it reports about 9000 checkstyle failures(see failures.txt[1]) > among 596 files(see files.txt[1]). Most of them > are related to

Re: [Request For Review] ZOOKEEPER-3474 a.k.a GH-1028

2019-08-05 Thread Zili Chen
Hi Enrico, Thanks for your participant! Running after turn on checkstyle on zookeeper-server it reports about 9000 checkstyle failures(see failures.txt[1]) among 596 files(see files.txt[1]). Most of them are related to whitespace and import. I think I can handle it with one or two whole days

Re: [Request For Review] ZOOKEEPER-3474 a.k.a GH-1028

2019-08-05 Thread Enrico Olivelli
Il giorno lun 5 ago 2019 alle ore 14:03 Zili Chen ha scritto: > Hi zookeepers, > > Recently I've sent a pr[1] on enable checkstyle configuration on > zookeeper-promethus-metrics, Enrico(committer) and Dinesh(contributor) > kindly reviewed it but we still need another look from committer as >

[Request For Review] ZOOKEEPER-3474 a.k.a GH-1028

2019-08-05 Thread Zili Chen
Hi zookeepers, Recently I've sent a pr[1] on enable checkstyle configuration on zookeeper-promethus-metrics, Enrico(committer) and Dinesh(contributor) kindly reviewed it but we still need another look from committer as process required. Someone of you has spare time to have a look? Besides, as