commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Gary Gregory <garydgreg...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [ALL] Commons Parent reports
Date Tue, 13 Mar 2012 18:07:45 GMT
On Mar 13, 2012, at 14:05, sebb <sebbaz@gmail.com> wrote:

> On 13 March 2012 17:59, Gary Gregory <garydgregory@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Mar 13, 2012, at 12:40, Gilles Sadowski <gilles@harfang.homelinux.org> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi.
>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>> [...]
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The tools are there, but you have to tell people that they _must_
use them.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Commons has already enough rules and process. As long as the releases
>>>>>> are have clean code I wouldn't be too anal about the commits in
>>>>>> between.
>>>>>
>>>>> I think that the main disagreement is here. Source code must be a clear
read
>>>>> for the _developers_. To put it bluntly, I don't care that the releases
have
>>>>> cleanly formatted code, as almost nobody is going to read those packaged
>>>>> sources!
>>
>> And another thing: the formatting /is/ important in released sources
>> because, again, this is what most users will see in their debuggers.
>> Have you seen some of the JRE sources? Some files are a mess, others
>> have blank lines in the middle of headers. Others look like they were
>> entered by a prisoner blinded in the noon day sun after spending a
>> month in the hole with bread and water ration and then given a stick
>> of butter for lunch.
>
> No, that was a 'tab' of butter (which then sometimes got stuck into the source).

Darn, I should have checkstyled my message!

Gary

>
>> Gary
>>
>>>>
>>>> Nobody objects using Checkstyle. Personally I object a default
>>>> Checkstyle config, which everybody must override. Nearly every
>>>> components has specifics, so everybody MUST override. What if you
>>>> don't want to use Checkstyle? Can you disable it?
>>>> What, if you use Sun conventions and Maven conventions are the
>>>> default? Much work! Please leave the checkstyle question to where it
>>>> belongs, and this is not parent pom, but the individual component.
>>>>
>>>> And thats what I meant with: as long as we don't have a common
>>>> codestyle, i does not make much sense to have a common checkstyle
>>>> configuration.
>>>
>>> I thought that the question was whether to generate a CheckStyle report, not
>>> whether the configuration should be the same...
>>>
>>>> Secondly, I have not had the feeling in the past years that checkstyle
>>>> helped me so much (including non open source projects). And so far, my
>>>> code was readable.
>>>
>>> My code is also readable...
>>>
>>> I forgot to mention earlier in this thread that a code formatter will not
>>> detect missing comments; I've also seen that some people using IDE let the
>>> software generate totally useless "place-holder" Javadoc comments. Hence
>>> no tool can afterwards detect that documentation is missing.
>>>
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Gilles
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org


Mime
View raw message