Mailing-List: contact dev-help@felix.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@felix.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of mcculls@gmail.com designates
 64.233.178.241 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
        h=message-id:date:from:sender:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references:x-google-sender-auth;
        b=TNWUQfEbvUgmE4XE+eiXDKhO7rSJYS6WzJjWoZAhd6aDtKL4HIGLZu6vXZWVqBare4gz9AXCU3V9GQ/JjHtQCS4D2zk5HVN6BRyyvzAbOWJR7659EQNkgxZP9l81NBfGUX80AqJXR9Q2XW7SaTCfd5o0FEp0a7UD7Sg+EaS2zkU=
Message-ID: <81f0d9c0712220507p2d81a554ub212cb0b85f76c3d@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 22 Dec 2007 21:07:32 +0800
From: "Stuart McCulloch" <stuart.mcculloch@jayway.net>
Sender: mcculls@gmail.com
To: dev@felix.apache.org
Subject: Re: Coding Standards [was [Quick vote] Coding Standard for Import
 Statements]
In-Reply-To: <476BFB78.4010902@interfree.it>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_Part_715_13212072.1198328852305"
References: <4767D62D.6000607@apache.org>
	 <C68B9B36-1F2C-49DD-BB16-1A2D0D9CE82D@luminis.nl>
	 <4768C698.6060806@apache.org> <476BFB78.4010902@interfree.it>

------=_Part_715_13212072.1198328852305
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline

On 22/12/2007, Stefano Lenzi <kismet@interfree.it> wrote:
>
> Carsten Ziegeler wrote:
> > I changed the subject for this general discussions, more comments below.
> >
> > Marcel Offermans wrote:
> >> If you don't mind, I do have a comment about this quick vote.
> > Sure, I don't mind :) - quiet the opposite :)
> >
> >> Let me
> >> start by stating that I think that coding standards are important. In
> >> fact, I was one of the people who pushed for them and came up with the
> >> draft for the first version of the document.
> >>
> >> However, I think the real discussion we should have is about formatting
> >> source code. Do we want to somehow make sure all code is formatted
> >> exactly the same? Does this mean we need to standardize on a single IDE
> >> or a separate formatting tool?
>
> I would like to propose the integration of maven-checkstyle-plugin in
> order main POM so that we can keep an eye on non-complaint sources.
> Furthermore, we can store the checkstyle and formatter configuration in
> our SVN repository, as many projects do.


we use checkstyle over at OPS4J and have our Eclipse formatter config in
svn,
and it's worked out well - using checkstyle is a great way to monitor the
code

Also by exploiting a common
> public location (the SVN repository in this case) containing a set of
> configuration file (both for checksyle and code formatting) we can
> auto-configure IDEs by an ad-hoc tuned POM.
>
> What do you think?


+1 (non-binding)  I'd find this very useful

-- 
Cheers, Stuart

------=_Part_715_13212072.1198328852305--