Mailing-List: contact dev-help@accumulo.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@accumulo.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of david.medinets@gmail.com
 designates 209.85.215.170 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAF1jEfDY6HL6MoqvnhvOyJzsB9_he8qT5mGGsR2Dyw6JO=yj_Q@mail.gmail.com>
References: 
 <CAOiJXP6Rwe5DJMW974kb5iRGXP3ZV3ie+-wtc9V4O0gu-ui+kg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAGUtCHpT26Gbg5mb7AjAbL2XCLZiM9_oRfsfuEPZkowNpLWk9Q@mail.gmail.com>
	<CADczPYTS9wVHxsbuUvo-ktjTRwy95TxYZdpHq__73LPG-QTHnA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAGUtCHpT69DkUZ2v2ozCM-yP-ZQWFD2UVa5hT6YfsmVMcsFKRg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CADczPYT+=f-94LomLdqABJZY6UbPFSfhJEr78FruR5sKCpv_NQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAF1jEfDKXQkLJE8ZPJkYAp8s3TZNZuN7v2Ap-oVGauYg7xsLoQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CADczPYS-UbMjTHVOwkrbV9vyTvtv4Yj4CvLx_cn86ZWqyrVNTg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAF1jEfDY6HL6MoqvnhvOyJzsB9_he8qT5mGGsR2Dyw6JO=yj_Q@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 7 Mar 2013 11:55:36 -0500
Message-ID: 
 <CAOiJXP6MkLEsGiJex2VsxgGShFzZCFaJ7XyF4LbXmhJOHTt2hg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: One of Checkstyle's rules is 'no spaces at end of line', anyone
 upset if I update the code (1.6) to follow it?
From: David Medinets <david.medinets@gmail.com>
To: dev@accumulo.apache.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

I thought it was a safe change because I made it to trunk. Sorry about
the disruption. Please revert. This issue is not worth spending any of
your time. And we can always run the script later to remove trailing
spaces. My concern is why  there was a disruption? Could I have done
something better?

On Thu, Mar 7, 2013 at 11:28 AM, Billie Rinaldi <billie@apache.org> wrote:
> Or we could apply the space changes to the 1.5 branch (not the pom change)
> ...
>
> Billie
>
>
> On Thu, Mar 7, 2013 at 11:24 AM, John Vines <vines@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> The only changes made to trunk since that were my merges, so it should be
>> pretty painless to roll it back, revert that change for now, and remerge.
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Mar 7, 2013 at 11:20 AM, Billie Rinaldi <billie@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>> > I don't mind if we roll it back until we stop doing so much merging.
>> >
>> > Billie
>> >
>> >
>> > On Thu, Mar 7, 2013 at 11:01 AM, John Vines <vines@apache.org> wrote:
>> >
>> > > Since it was introduced yesterday morning, every merge I've done had at
>> > > least 1 conflict file, usually multiple. And one to many merges per
>> file
>> > > (which is how I missed that one yesterday).
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > On Thu, Mar 7, 2013 at 10:57 AM, Keith Turner <keith@deenlo.com>
>> wrote:
>> > >
>> > > > On Thu, Mar 7, 2013 at 10:49 AM, John Vines <vines@apache.org>
>> wrote:
>> > > > > I've been getting unnecessary merge conflicts because of this
>> change.
>> > > At
>> > > > > the very least, I would like to see it reverted until we release
>> 1.5
>> > > >
>> > > > Or maybe make the change after 1.5.1.  Based on past experience,
>> there
>> > > > will likely be a good bit of merge activity from 1.5 to 1.6 until at
>> > > > least the first 1.5 bug fix release.
>> > > >
>> > > > Curious, how much extra time do this add to merging for you?  I do
>> not
>> > > > have a good feeling for how well this will be handled automatically.
>> > > > Did it cause conflicts for most of the edits you made in 1.5?
>> > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > > > On Thu, Mar 7, 2013 at 10:44 AM, Keith Turner <keith@deenlo.com>
>> > > wrote:
>> > > > >
>> > > > >> On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 10:23 AM, David Medinets
>> > > > >> <david.medinets@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > > > >> > I have a free day due to snowfall and while this is a fairly
>> silly
>> > > > >> > rule, writing a short script to rule all the java files through
>> > sed
>> > > > >> > should be fairly painless. As part of this change, I will
>> commit a
>> > > > >> > one-rule checkstyle.xml file which just runs this 'no spaces at
>> > end
>> > > of
>> > > > >> > line' rule. Over time, more rules can be added to that align
>> with
>> > > the
>> > > > >> > Accumulo community's style guidelines.
>> > > > >> >
>> > > > >> > Any objection?
>> > > > >>
>> > > > >> Whats the benefit of doing this?  How will it impact merges from
>> 1.5
>> > > > >> to 1.6?  Should this be done for thrift generated code?
>> > > > >>
>> > > >
>> > >
>> >
>>