commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From sebb <seb...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [ALL] Commons Parent reports
Date Tue, 13 Mar 2012 18:04:33 GMT
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).

> 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


Mime
View raw message