Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-jakarta-ant-dev-archive@apache.org Received: (qmail 95894 invoked from network); 15 Jan 2002 21:37:06 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO nagoya.betaversion.org) (192.18.49.131) by daedalus.apache.org with SMTP; 15 Jan 2002 21:37:06 -0000 Received: (qmail 9330 invoked by uid 97); 15 Jan 2002 21:37:07 -0000 Delivered-To: qmlist-jakarta-archive-ant-dev@jakarta.apache.org Received: (qmail 9314 invoked by uid 97); 15 Jan 2002 21:37:07 -0000 Mailing-List: contact ant-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Help: List-Post: List-Id: "Ant Developers List" Reply-To: "Ant Developers List" Delivered-To: mailing list ant-dev@jakarta.apache.org Received: (qmail 9272 invoked from network); 15 Jan 2002 21:37:05 -0000 Message-ID: <01b201c19e05$0d7aa0d0$b81c570f@cv.hp.com> From: "Steve Loughran" To: "Ant Developers List" References: <9B3E950CB293D411ADF4009027B0A4D202AFE0C3@maileu.imediation.com> Subject: Re: Ant Coding guidelines Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2002 12:41:45 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 X-ECS-MailScanner: Found to be clean X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N ----- Original Message ----- From: "Stephane Bailliez" To: "Ant Developers List" Sent: Tuesday, January 15, 2002 06:07 Subject: RE: Ant Coding guidelines > -----Original Message----- > From: Steve Loughran [mailto:steve_l@iseran.com] [...] >>Plus of course: jdepend, (litte french language joke there >>Stephane?), and jprobe coverage. If someone has these tools on their system >Absolutely not. >It is the name used. The class itself is 'MAudit'. and the launcher is >'maudit' Oh, I always assumed it was, and have been awaiting the defect reporting task to go with it, or thought you were doing a series on the mont blanc massif, with Mont Maudit (a subsidiary peak) being the first implementation. >>I guess that is the diff between local team projects and big OSS efforts; it >>is harder to enforce things. In our team we can say things like "Comment >>your code like that and we send you the Cold Room for half an hour to >>install stuff on the server"; the room being so cold that would be against >Lucky you ! I found it easier in OSS than in a company because people are >usually more responsible. Many people in a company are developpers because >it's quite well payed and there is no real problem to find a job and don't >give a s* about what they are doing and don't have the cense of ownership in >their work. >It is nonetheless impossible to somewhat 'threaten' people because you can't >fired people like this in France. Firing people for not respecting coding >guidelines will not be interpreted as 'faute grave' (ie: professional >mistake) by the law and the employee can sue the company for $ or ask to >reintegrate the company. >You have to be very careful when hiring someone. It is easier to fire >someone because he did not dress correctly rather than because he f* up >something or does nothing. Yeah I've worked with french companies. some of the people are very smart, others utterly incompetent, the latter are worse than empty heads on a team as they not only cause damage that needs fixing, they raise management expectations. We dont need to resort to serious forms of reinforcement for negative behavior, because is something doesnt work, ops phone you up at whatever time of night (*), even if you are sleeping in a snow hole half way up mount jefferson at the time. It's easy to focus people on a simple "screw up and you get woken up" rule, but that doesnt address productivity, only code quality. (*) of course, since fatherhood arrived this doesnt scare me any more -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: For additional commands, e-mail: