camel-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Raul Kripalani <r...@evosent.com>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] - Moving towards Camel 2.11 release
Date Wed, 23 Jan 2013 21:33:21 GMT
Isn't it less intrusive to wrap this block in //CHECKSTYLE:OFF and
//CHECKSTYLE:ON?

If it's really just the one-off case, changing the checkstyle rule for the
entire codebase seems overkill.

Regards,
Raúl.
On 23 Jan 2013 22:18, "Babak Vahdat" <babak.vahdat@swissonline.ch> wrote:

>
>
> Am 23.01.13 16:16 schrieb "Claus Ibsen" unter <claus.ibsen@gmail.com>:
>
> >On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 1:15 PM, Babak Vahdat
> ><babak.vahdat@swissonline.ch> wrote:
> >> Hi
> >>
> >> Recently Bilgin did kindly integrate his camel-redis component @ GitHub
> >>to
> >> the Camel distribution, however I think currently we don't own any
> >>proper
> >> documentation for it when 2.11.0 goes live:
> >>
> >> http://camel.apache.org/components.html
> >>
> >
> >Ah well spotted. Feel free to log a JIRA ticket about the missing docs.
> >
> >
> >> It's also missing by the release notes as a new component:
> >>
> >> http://camel.apache.org/camel-2110-release.html
> >
> >Yeah maybe add a note to the doc JIRA about adding to release notes.
> >And we may also need an karaf feature for it in features.xml.
> >
> >And osgi unit tests as well.
>
> Logged the following 2 tickets regarding this:
>
>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CAMEL-6001
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CAMEL-6002
>
>
>
> >
> >
> >
> >>
> >> Currently it has got a CS violation where a method by
> >>CommandDispatcher.java
> >> is 303 lines long (maximum allowed is 200). We could either adjust the
> >>code
> >> or the CS rule for that.
> >>
> >
> >And fell free to fix any CS issues you may encounter reported by the
> >maven tooling.
>
> Actually yesterday I had already fixed all of the CS violations on the
> trunk other than this one (on purpose) as I wanted to ask others about
> their opinion before going for it:
>
> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=1437208
>
> As this one is different (302 lines of code in one method instead of the
> maximally allowed 200). I propose to relax the checkstyle rule about this,
> let's say 350 lines instead of 200. Then this would already fix this last
> violation automatically. The other option would be to split that method
> into 2 or 3 sub-methods but looking at the logic of that method IMHO this
> wouldn't make much sense.
>
> Following is the checkstyle setting we've got for this:
>
> <module name="MethodLength">
>   <property name="max" value="200"/>
>   <property name="countEmpty" value="false"/>
>         </module>
>
>
> Babak
>
> >
> >
> >> Babak
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> View this message in context:
> >>
> http://camel.465427.n5.nabble.com/DISCUSS-Moving-towards-Camel-2-11-relea
> >>se-tp5725088p5726054.html
> >> Sent from the Camel Development mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
> >
> >
> >
> >--
> >Claus Ibsen
> >-----------------
> >Red Hat, Inc.
> >FuseSource is now part of Red Hat
> >Email: cibsen@redhat.com
> >Web: http://fusesource.com
> >Twitter: davsclaus
> >Blog: http://davsclaus.com
> >Author of Camel in Action: http://www.manning.com/ibsen
>
>
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message