Re: FindBugs exclusion policy proposal

2011-02-26 Thread Jeremias Maerki
No rationale, just an opinion: FindBugs is a great tool for pointing to potential problems. But the results are not black and white. Checkstyle is more black and white but also not completely. Having no FindBug error doesn't mean the code works and having a FindBug error doesn't mean there is a

[GUMP@vmgump]: Project xml-fop-test (in module xml-fop) failed

2011-02-26 Thread Jeremias Maerki
To whom it may engage... This is an automated request, but not an unsolicited one. For more information please visit http://gump.apache.org/nagged.html, and/or contact the folk at gene...@gump.apache.org. Project xml-fop-test has an issue affecting its community integration. This issue

Re: FindBugs exclusion policy proposal

2011-02-26 Thread Glenn Adams
Establishing a zero-FindBugs policy at build level: absolutely not. So you offer no rationale or reason for such an opinion? Or your only reason for this is that FindBugs is not perfect? Or because you find it too troublesome to type ant findbugs and look at the results? Shocking. G. On

Re: FindBugs exclusion policy proposal

2011-02-26 Thread J.Pietschmann
On 26.02.2011 15:05, Glenn Adams wrote: Establishing a zero-FindBugs policy at build level: absolutely not. So you offer no rationale or reason for such an opinion? Or your only reason for this is that FindBugs is not perfect? Or because you find it too troublesome to type ant findbugs and

Re: FindBugs exclusion policy proposal

2011-02-26 Thread Glenn Adams
On Sat, Feb 26, 2011 at 2:14 PM, J.Pietschmann j3322...@yahoo.de wrote: On 26.02.2011 15:05, Glenn Adams wrote: Establishing a zero-FindBugs policy at build level: absolutely not. So you offer no rationale or reason for such an opinion? Or your only reason for this is that FindBugs is