commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Olivier Lamy <ol...@apache.org>
Subject Re: ETA SvnPubSub site migration
Date Wed, 09 Jan 2013 15:47:26 GMT
2013/1/9 Phil Steitz <phil.steitz@gmail.com>:
> On 1/9/13 7:14 AM, Olivier Lamy wrote:
>> What about having a reporting profile (enabled per default).
>> And using -DskipReports to not generated cobertura, findbugs etc..
>>
>> Perso I like this idea as currently when you want to test a typo fix
>> in a .apt or .xdoc it's very long to generate the site only for a typo
>> fix in documentation.
>
> Agreed.  Back in the very old m1 days, you could do something like
> "maven xdoc" to just gen the xdoc-based html.  Is there a m2 way to
> do this?
nope or I don't know this feature.

>
> Phil
>>
>> 2013/1/9 Gilles Sadowski <gilles@harfang.homelinux.org>:
>>> On Wed, Jan 09, 2013 at 08:37:33AM -0500, Gary Gregory wrote:
>>>> On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 8:11 AM, Gilles Sadowski <
>>>> gilles@harfang.homelinux.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, Jan 09, 2013 at 07:25:45AM -0500, Gary Gregory wrote:
>>>>>> IMO code coverage should be part of the standard documentation for
a
>>>>>> component.  Looking at code coverage helps establish or shake my
>>>>>> confidence in a component. It should definitively be part of ones
>>>>>> development checklist, I like to have the best code coverage for
any
>>>>>> new code that I check in.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Gary
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Jan 9, 2013, at 5:16, Olivier Lamy <olamy@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi Folks,
>>>>>>> I have started importing some content for sub projects (exec,
>>>>>>> collections). I will try to do more later.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Where is the place to document that ?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Note: currently some content is imported which could be removed
(I
>>>>>>> think about cobertura for modules which use sonar).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> What is the status about moving cobertura to a dedicated profile
in
>>>>>>> parent pom ?
>>>>>>> Can I move it to a reporting profile in parent pom ?
>>>>>>>
>>>>> For [Math] it would be much better (since AFAIK nobody came up with a
way
>>>>> to
>>>>> disable Cobertura on a per-component basis).
>>>>>
>>>>> From what I infer from looking at the Sonar report page, we could have
the
>>>>> best of all worlds if every Commons project were registered indepently
in
>>>>> Sonar. Currently, there is one "Commons Proper Aggregator Project
>>>>> 1.0-SNAPSHOT" (which does not represent the actual situation that the
>>>>> components are independent from each other). However, it seems that with
>>>>> several projects registered, it could be possible to compare two versions
>>>>> of the same project, thereby providing complete information on the
>>>>> evolution
>>>>> of the code. Am I wrong?
>>>>>
>>>> Sonar has no value for local development though (before you commit). I need
>>>> the reports to run locally when, for example, I am improving code coverage,
>>>> fixing FindBugs, PMD, and Checkstyle issues.
>>> Nothing will prevent you to run Cobertura by calling the new profile
>>> explicitly. We've explained that Cobertura is a PITA for Commons Math
>>> developers.
>>>
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> 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
>



--
Olivier Lamy
Talend: http://coders.talend.com
http://twitter.com/olamy | http://linkedin.com/in/olamy

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


Mime
View raw message