Mailing-List: contact dev-help@commons.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: "Commons Developers List" <dev@commons.apache.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20130109135010.GY20488@dusk.harfang.homelinux.org>
References: 
 <CAPoyBqQX6WVUVSFmqxknwCiG=PXbsvpw3D2R78EGR5w=RudBwA@mail.gmail.com>
 <3922661237479044344@unknownmsgid>
 <20130109131122.GW20488@dusk.harfang.homelinux.org>
 <CACZkXPzBDe5FebG6pgqSFfoFFayQGPFe1EUTovpyk5iaLXEXXg@mail.gmail.com>
 <20130109135010.GY20488@dusk.harfang.homelinux.org>
From: Olivier Lamy <olamy@apache.org>
Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2013 16:14:12 +0100
Message-ID: 
 <CAPoyBqTbqdeYtab9N-1pRQCqsiC=T0QYPRew2MM9OQX2CCx=TQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: ETA SvnPubSub site migration
To: Commons Developers List <dev@commons.apache.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

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.

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
>


-- 
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