commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Simone Tripodi <>
Subject Re: [vfs] checkstyle - was Re: svn commit: r1245166 - in /commons/proper/vfs/trunk/core/src/main/java/org/apache/commons/vfs2: provider/ provider/http/ provider/https/ provider/ram/ provider/sftp/ provider/tar/ util/
Date Sun, 19 Feb 2012 13:12:35 GMT
> I'm +1 as well. A common style would make development easier. I think configuration files
should be downloadable from commons website. Maybe that will spare some "good patch but there
are some style issues..." replies to new contributors. ;-)

-1 we've let each component developers the freedom to choice their
preferred style. What is the reason to tie down the whole community to
a unique style? What will be next? The ASF style? seriously?

>> I use IntelliJ so obviously I'd want a style that it can handle.  FWIW, Jetbrains
provides a free license for the full product for open source development or you can use the
community edition.
> So are you suggesting that everybody should use IntelliJ? I use eclipse and I'm happy
with that (Most of the time ;-)

+1 as well, users have to feel free to choice their preferred IDE -
even EMACS/vi if they feel comfortable with it :)


On Sun, Feb 19, 2012 at 9:50 AM, Benedikt Ritter
<> wrote:
> Am 18.02.2012 um 19:06 schrieb Ralph Goers <>:
>> On Feb 18, 2012, at 8:54 AM, Luc Maisonobe wrote:
>>> Le 18/02/2012 17:27, Gary Gregory a écrit :
>>>> On Feb 18, 2012, at 11:00, Oliver Heger <>
>>>>> Am 18.02.2012 15:25, schrieb Ralph Goers:
>>>>>> On Feb 18, 2012, at 3:20 AM, Luc Maisonobe<>
>>>>>>> Le 17/02/2012 23:30, Ralph Goers a écrit :
>>>>>>>> On Feb 17, 2012, at 2:18 PM, Gary Gregory wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> That seems like way too much effort for very little
benefit.  In fact,
>>>>>>>>>> when I created the checkstyle configuration I started
from the one used by
>>>>>>>>>> Commons Configuration and then tweaked it to shut
up a bunch of the
>>>>>>>>>> "errors" I didn't care about and that seemed to have
been the convention of
>>>>>>>>>> the existing code base.  I'd prefer that all of
commons use the same
>>>>>>>>>> checkstyle configuration.
>>>>>>>>> +1, that would be great, we could put it in the parent
POM and be done with
>>>>>>>>> it once and for all.
>>>>>>> Are we sure all components use the same style ?
>>>>>>> The checkstyle.xml file for [math] origin has evolved its own
>>>>>>> partly when the mantissa library has been merged. I am pretty
sure it is
>>>>>>> not compatible with other ones.
>>>>>> That was kind of the point for using a single checkstyle config.
Why should the various projects use different rules?
>>>>> For instance, [configuration] has a different coding style than [lang].
>>>>> Personally, I do not prefer one format over the other. I am +1 for a
>>>>> commons wide checkstyle policy. However, doing the reformatting is
>>>>> probably a pain.
>>>> We can pick a format that IDEs can perform automatically.
>>> The style we use for [math] has an eclipse configuration counterpart at
>>> <> which does almost
>>> everything automatically. There is only one gltich I was not able to
>>> fix: the indent size of the "throws" statement in method signatures
>>> which cannot be set to any value on which checkstyle and eclipse could
>>> agree. So when we do automatic formatting with eclipse, these lines are
>>> flagged by checkstyle as having wrong indentation. I did not check since
>>> one or two years, though, so there may be a setting for this now.

>> Ralph
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
>> For additional commands, e-mail:
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> For additional commands, e-mail:

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message