lucene-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Robert Muir <>
Subject Re: wind down for 3.1?
Date Tue, 15 Feb 2011 02:51:01 GMT
On Mon, Feb 14, 2011 at 6:04 PM, Grant Ingersoll <> wrote:
> I can tell you that I often stop reviewing a patch as soon as I notice it
> doesn't have tests.    In fact, I wish we could get the Hadoop Hudson
> auto-test stuff hooked in so that it would -1 patches that don't have tests.
> So, if it sorely needs to be committed, then it sorely needs tests written.

+1, I really wish we had this hooked in. there are just so many things
that its impossible to stay on top of, these are my 3 biggest pet
peeves coming to mind

1. javadocs warnings/errors: this is a constant battle, its worth
considering if the build should actually fail if you get one of these,
in my opinion if we can do this we really should. its frustrating to
keep the javadocs warnings down to zero, yet we shouldnt have invalid
references etc in our documentation.
2. introducing new compiler warnings: another problem just being left
for someone else to clean up later, another constant losing battle.
99% of the time (for non-autogenerated code) the warnings are
useful... in my opinion we should not commit patches that create new
3. svn-eol style, i run a script periodically and convert all of this.
It seems a lot of people don't have their svn's configured to set this
automatically. Please configure your subversion according to apache
standards:, especially if
you care about being able to see line-by-line history. Otherwise my
script will periodically perform massive changes to the codebase,
including in some cases changing every single line of code in affected

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message