Mailing-List: contact common-dev-help@hadoop.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: common-dev@hadoop.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: message received from 54.164.171.186
 which is an MX secondary for common-dev@hadoop.apache.org)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <C040414A-E6D4-483D-A11F-2AA1752CCF3E@altiscale.com>
References: <ACEFED78-5640-4439-8F1C-26027214F7D7@altiscale.com>
	<8D5F7E3237B3ED47B84CF187BB17B66611B352B0@SHSMSX103.ccr.corp.intel.com>
	<8999F4C9-A56A-4CF3-AC46-053EA407625B@altiscale.com>
	<47887D7E-5782-4C31-A458-010DDD6229B7@hortonworks.com>
	<CAFqyyL=Gc1wD467Zb1j-tyuAb6n32g7mPbqmE0+4hXbXmZQVBQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<C040414A-E6D4-483D-A11F-2AA1752CCF3E@altiscale.com>
Date: Fri, 24 Apr 2015 10:42:10 -0700
Message-ID: 
 <CAFqyyLnO3Bczu+r=pVO=kiBhRdN518dPEWKvVAN83soDP1sSdw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: IMPORTANT: testing patches for branches
From: Sidharta Seethana <sidharta.apache@gmail.com>
To: common-dev@hadoop.apache.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7b873cbe73019805147bea3d

--047d7b873cbe73019805147bea3d
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Allen,

I am not questioning whether checkstyle is a requirement. My concern is
that some of the rules in there are arcane/unnecessary - we should use a
better list of rules, in my opinion. This is why I filed HADOOP-11869. As
pointed out by Jason, this is not a dupe of HADOOP-11866
<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-11866> unless scope is being
increased.

thanks,
-Sidharta

On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 12:55 AM, Allen Wittenauer <aw@altiscale.com> wrote=
:

>
>
>
> On Apr 23, 2015, at 7:57 PM, Sidharta Seethana <sidharta.apache@gmail.com=
>
> wrote:
>
> > About (3.) , a lot of the check style rules seem to be
> arcane/unnecessary.
> > Please see : https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-11869
>
>
> a) I've closed it as a dupe of HADOOP-11866 to keep everything in one
> place.
>
> b) I've had HADOOP-11778 open for a while to update checkstyle to a more
> modern version=E2=80=A6. which will also likely fix HADOOP-11546.
>
> c) According to our commit guidelines, checkstyle is a requirement for
> commitment.  If we want to remove that requirement, we need to modify the
> guidelines and comment out the registration line in the checkstyle.sh
> plugin. We've been ignoring it for whatever reasons, likely because the
> code in the old test-patch.sh was pretty broken to the point of being
> disabled.
>
>
>         Personally, while some view this as a "minor formatting issue", i=
t
> reflects poorly on the project to have every file formatted differently.
> check style is meant to enforce those rules.   This *is* a quality check.
>
>         Given that branch-2 went from "stable" (~2.4) to "beta" (~2.6) to
> "alpha" (officially 2.7), well=E2=80=A6 I guess I shouldn't be surprised =
that
> quality is going down though.

--047d7b873cbe73019805147bea3d--