Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-click-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 22737 invoked from network); 26 May 2010 07:35:25 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.3) by 140.211.11.9 with SMTP; 26 May 2010 07:35:25 -0000 Received: (qmail 20938 invoked by uid 500); 26 May 2010 07:35:25 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-click-dev-archive@click.apache.org Received: (qmail 20880 invoked by uid 500); 26 May 2010 07:35:24 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@click.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: dev@click.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list dev@click.apache.org Received: (qmail 20873 invoked by uid 99); 26 May 2010 07:35:24 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 26 May 2010 07:35:24 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.9 required=10.0 tests=FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_NUMERIC_HELO,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS,T_TO_NO_BRKTS_FREEMAIL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of gcwcd-click-development-2@m.gmane.org designates 80.91.229.12 as permitted sender) Received: from [80.91.229.12] (HELO lo.gmane.org) (80.91.229.12) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 26 May 2010 07:35:16 +0000 Received: from list by lo.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OHB8Y-0000IH-Of for dev@click.apache.org; Wed, 26 May 2010 09:34:46 +0200 Received: from 85.121.188.244 ([85.121.188.244]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Wed, 26 May 2010 09:34:46 +0200 Received: from a.adrian.tech by 85.121.188.244 with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Wed, 26 May 2010 09:34:46 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: dev@click.apache.org connect(): No such file or directory From: "Adrian A." Subject: Re: [jira] Closed: (CLK-671) Upgrade to Checkstyle 5.1 Date: Wed, 26 May 2010 09:34:06 +0200 Lines: 31 Message-ID: References: <4642024.55781273400688026.JavaMail.jira@thor> <11607911.38381274807664229.JavaMail.jira@thor> <4BFC7D93.2010603@gmail.com> <4BFCC8E6.7000400@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: 85.121.188.244 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.0; en-US; rv:1.9.1.9) Gecko/20100317 Thunderbird/3.0.4 In-Reply-To: <4BFCC8E6.7000400@gmail.com> > Oh. I don't think there is a need to run checkstyle on binaries though. Checkstyle is not "running" on binaries - it only needs them for implementation simplicity (internal stuff I guess). > Can we just remove those > checks that require binary. Practically most would require the binaries (or might). This is why they were included in the classpath (by Malcolm?) from the beginning: and: ..... usually when working in IDEs (if project paths are configured correctly), there will always be compiled classes there. For running on the server, we might add that "depends" property, or simply inform and let the user do it (the same way it happens with get-deps too - the user must call it). Adrian.