On Thursday 14 October 2010 8:34:55 pm Benson Margulies wrote: > Let's slow down a bit on this idea and discuss it on the dev list. > FindBugs has a very, very, very broad definition of a bug. I bet there > are cases where checkstyle and findbugs *disagree* about some source > construct. > > Things it complains of should be talked over on dev before anyone > bothers to make patches. > > Our Sonar instances already runs it, I believe, so you can see what it > complains about already.
The problem with the Sonar setup is that we have no control over it. The Sonar folks set it up and pretty much uses their defaults for everything. As an example, it uses THEIR checkstyle and PMD rules. Since we run PMD and Checkstyle as part of our builds base on OUR preferences, we should never see a failure, but we do there as their rules are different. At one point, there was talk of setting up a Sonar instance in Apache that we could completely setup and control, just never seemed to have happened. I'm not OPPOSED to using Findbugs, but with a codebase as large as CXF, it would take quite a bit of work to get it to a point like where we are with Checkstyle/PMD. The starting point would need to be setting up a profile to run it, then use that to find tune a config file for it that sets up reasonable sets of issues, and then fix the issues. Patches welcome! :-) Dan > > On Thu, Oct 14, 2010 at 5:27 PM, Daniel Kulp <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Thursday 14 October 2010 10:53:17 am Robert Liguori wrote: > >> I see that CXF makes use of PMD and Checkstyle ( > >> http://cxf.apache.org/coding-guidelines.html). > >> > >> Any reason why CXF doesn't make use of FindBugs? - > >> http://findbugs.sourceforge.net/ > > > > Most likely, no one really pursued it. Again, fixing issues that it > > finds is another valuable contribution. > > > > -- > > Daniel Kulp > > [email protected] > > http://dankulp.com/blog -- Daniel Kulp [email protected] http://dankulp.com/blog
