zookeeper-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Zili Chen <wander4...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Clean up the all the checkstyle violations in the zookeeper-server module
Date Wed, 17 Jul 2019 10:06:50 GMT
Enrico,

Sounds reasonable since checkstyle is part of building cycle. Thanks!

Best,
tison.


Enrico Olivelli <eolivelli@gmail.com> 于2019年7月17日周三 下午6:01写道:

> Zili,
> I think 'build' is a good option
>
> Enrico
>
> Il giorno mer 17 lug 2019 alle ore 11:18 Zili Chen <wander4096@gmail.com>
> ha scritto:
>
> > Andor & Enrico,
> >
> > I find there is no proper JIRA component this thread can be put under.
> >
> > Any advise?(Both "document" or "server" used now seems not quite
> accurate.
> >
> > Best,
> > tison.
> >
> >
> > Zili Chen <wander4096@gmail.com> 于2019年7月16日周二 下午6:28写道:
> >
> > > Hi Justin,
> > >
> > > Thanks for the reply.
> > >
> > > I will close ZOOKEEPER-3446 later in fact. Because
> > > our consensus above is that we would add the checkstyle
> > > configuration at first and enable it per module.
> > >
> > > I'm glad to follow ZOOKEEPER-3431 to see if anything I
> > > can help with.
> > >
> > > Best,
> > > tison.
> > >
> > >
> > > Justin Ling Mao <maoling199210191@sina.com> 于2019年7月16日周二
下午6:19写道:
> > >
> > >> -1. @Zili Chen
> > >> I had linked ZOOKEEPER-3434(closed),ZOOKEEPER-3446 to the
> > >> *ZOOKEEPER-3431* which now is a Umbrella JIRA (Type:Task).
> > >> I will also take your advice about the subtasks.
> > >> -2 --->"*Please add jute and Prometheus module*"
> > >> @Olivelli.That's OK.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> ----- Original Message -----
> > >> From: Zili Chen <wander4096@gmail.com>
> > >> To: DevZooKeeper <dev@zookeeper.apache.org>
> > >> Cc: maoling199210191@sina.com
> > >> Subject: Re: Re: Re: Re: Clean up the all the checkstyle violations in
> > >> the zookeeper-server module
> > >> Date: 2019-07-16 15:18
> > >>
> > >> The main concern here is that we have already too
> > >> many issues on enable specific rules on zookeeper,
> > >> including ZOOKEEPER-3434 and ZOOKEEPER-3446,
> > >> and it would be quite noisy to enable per rule(as
> > >> been described and reached a consensus).
> > >>
> > >> Best,
> > >> tison.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> Zili Chen <wander4096@gmail.com> 于2019年7月16日周二 上午9:17写道:
> > >>
> > >> Hi Justin,
> > >>
> > >> Thanks for driving this thread. Please go ahead!
> > >>
> > >> One thing I'd like to pick up is that ZOOKEEPER-3431
> > >> has a specific description and I'm afraid it could not
> > >> be an umbrella issue.
> > >>
> > >> How about close all checkstyle related issues and start
> > >> a new issues structure as
> > >>
> > >> Umbrella: Enable Google checkstyle configuration
> > >>   Subtask-1: Add silent Google checkstyle configuration
> > >>   Subtask-2: Enable Google checkstyle configuration on
> zookeeper-server
> > >>   Subtask-3: Enable Google checkstyle configuration on zookeeper-jute
> > >>   Subtask-4: Enable Google checkstyle configuration on
> > >> zookeeper-prometheus
> > >>   ...
> > >>
> > >> Best,
> > >> tison.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> Enrico Olivelli <eolivelli@gmail.com> 于2019年7月16日周二 上午12:06写道:
> > >>
> > >> Il lun 15 lug 2019, 09:14 Justin Ling Mao <maoling199210191@sina.com>
> > ha
> > >> scritto:
> > >>
> > >> > - any advance for the discussion???- any objections about these two
> > >> > things: 1.only clean the main-module:zookeeper-server;
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> Please add jute and Prometheus module
> > >>
> > >> 2.using the google's checkstyle_style?-
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> Works for me
> > >>
> > >> > who will head it up?  how about me?
> > >> >
> > >>
> > >> Sure! Go for it. Thanks
> > >>
> > >> Enrico
> > >>
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > ----- Original Message -----
> > >> > From: "Justin Ling Mao" <maoling199210191@sina.com>
> > >> > To: "dev" <dev@zookeeper.apache.org>
> > >> > Subject: Re: Re: Re: Clean up the all the checkstyle violations in
> the
> > >> > zookeeper-server module
> > >> > Date: 2019-07-07 15:56
> > >> >
> > >> > 1.--->“we'd better first create an umbrella issue named "Enable
> > >> checkstyle
> > >> > rules" or sth”I had created ZOOKEEPER-3431 previously, and we can
> > >> create a
> > >> > series of sub-tasks under it.
> > >> > 2.I think we still have two things which should be discussed:  2.1
> > >> > Currently, we only need to enforce the checkstyle violations check
> in
> > >> the
> > >> > main-module:zookeeper-server, not included other modules?      IMO,
> > >> because
> > >> > the zookeeper-contrib, zookeeper-recipes are now not
> well-maintained.
> > >> > and some violations in the zookeeper-jute are auto-generated. so
> > >> focusing
> > >> > on zookeeper-server is enough?
> > >> >   2.2 What checkstyle template we will pick up? Now we have three
> > >> > options:      A:[google_style](
> > >> > https://checkstyle.sourceforge.io/google_style.html)
> > >> > B:[bookkeeper_style] (
> > >> >
> > >>
> >
> https://github.com/apache/bookkeeper/blob/master/buildtools/src/main/resources/bookkeeper/checkstyle.xml
> > >> )
> > >> >     C:[hbase_style](
> > >> >
> > >>
> >
> https://github.com/apache/hbase/blob/master/hbase-checkstyle/src/main/resources/hbase/checkstyle.xml
> > >> )
> > >> >     Which one will we choose?
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > ----- Original Message -----
> > >> > From: Enrico Olivelli <eolivelli@gmail.com>
> > >> > To: dev@zookeeper.apache.org
> > >> > Cc: maoling199210191@sina.com
> > >> > Subject: Re: Re: Clean up the all the checkstyle violations in the
> > >> > zookeeper-server module
> > >> > Date: 2019-07-07 15:13
> > >> >
> > >> > Il dom 7 lug 2019, 01:29 Zili Chen <wander4096@gmail.com> ha
> scritto:
> > >> > > Justin & Enrico,
> > >> > >
> > >> > > Receiving no opposition on this proposal, we could regard it
as
> > >> > > a consensus. According to bookkeeper#230 we'd better first create
> > >> > > an umbrella issue named "Enable checkstyle rules" or sth. Under
> > >> > > there we can finally decide the checkstyle configuration and
> > >> > > start sub-tasks enabling per package.
> > >> > >
> > >> > > For keeping current checkstyle, I'd like to pick up that it's
> > >> > > possible that we remain the current simple config for all pkgs,
> > >> > > adding a config said copied from bookkeeper named
> > >> > > "strict-checkstyle.xml", enabling per pkg, which contains @author
> > >> > > tags and rules in simple config. Once we enabling the strict
one
> > >> > > for all pkgs. We can merge two configs into one.
> > >> > >
> > >> > +1 please go ahead
> > >> > Enrico
> > >> > > Best,
> > >> > > tison.
> > >> > >
> > >> > >
> > >> > > Enrico Olivelli <eolivelli@gmail.com> 于2019年7月6日周六
下午8:20写道:
> > >> > >
> > >> > > > Justin,
> > >> > > > This is how we did it in Bookkeeper, we enabled checkstyle
only
> > for
> > >> > group
> > >> > > > of packages in the main module (the biggest one,
> > bookkeeper-server)
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > https://github.com/apache/bookkeeper/issues/230
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > I suggest using that checkstyle config, I feel we won't
have so
> > many
> > >> > > > violations.
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > We can keep current checkstyle invokation that checks for
> @author
> > >> tags
> > >> > > as a
> > >> > > > separate 'execution' of the plugin with a specific checkstyle
> file
> > >> (as
> > >> > > you
> > >> > > > already said)
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > I am happy to help, thank you for driving this effort
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > Enrico
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > Il sab 6 lug 2019, 11:33 Justin Ling Mao <
> > maoling199210191@sina.com
> > >> >
> > >> > ha
> > >> > > > scritto:
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > > - 1.It seems that we had reached a consensus to work
on this.-
> > 2.I
> > >> > also
> > >> > > > > agree on the way: fix one package at a time, then another.-
> > 3.Now
> > >> Let
> > >> > > us
> > >> > > > > discuss some details:    - 3.1 how to make the checkstyle
only
> > >> check
> > >> > > the
> > >> > > > > package we specify? I found this:      URL:
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > >
> > >> > >
> > >> >
> > >>
> >
> https://stackoverflow.com/questions/26455174/only-enable-some-checks-for-certain-inner-package
> > >> > > > >     @Olivelli Could you give me more your insight?
   - 3.2
> What
> > >> > rules
> > >> > > > will
> > >> > > > > we init in the checkstyle.xml?       3.2.1 - I also
think the
> > >> rules
> > >> > > from
> > >> > > > > the hbase is too strict which will cause too many,many
> > violations.
> > >> > > > >  3.2.2 - apply the "Google's Java Style Checkstyle
Coverage"
> is
> > a
> > >> > good
> > >> > > > > option? which seems to be more simplify and more suitable
for
> > us?
> > >> > > > >      URL:https://checkstyle.sourceforge.io/google_style.html
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > >> > > > > From: Andor Molnar <andor@cloudera.com.INVALID>
> > >> > > > > To: DevZooKeeper <dev@zookeeper.apache.org>
> > >> > > > > Subject: Re: Clean up the all the checkstyle violations
in the
> > >> > > > > zookeeper-server module
> > >> > > > > Date: 2019-07-02 13:22
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > Yes. That way we only need to fix one package at a
time.
> > >> > > > > Andor
> > >> > > > > On Mon, Jul 1, 2019 at 4:10 PM Zili Chen <
> wander4096@gmail.com>
> > >> > wrote:
> > >> > > > > > Hi Andor,
> > >> > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > To be exact, "iterations" means we define the
original rules
> > >> > > > > > in checkstyle configuration at once and turn them
on one
> > package
> > >> > > > > > after another, so iterations. Is it correct?
> > >> > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > Best,
> > >> > > > > > tison.
> > >> > > > > >
> > >> > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > Andor Molnar <andor@apache.org> 于2019年7月1日周一
下午9:09写道:
> > >> > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > I like the idea of doing this in iterations.
> > >> > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > Andor
> > >> > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > > On 2019. Jun 29., at 8:35, Zili Chen
<
> > wander4096@gmail.com>
> > >> > > wrote:
> > >> > > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > > A solution could be, we remains current
simple
> > configuration
> > >> > > > > > > > and introduce a so-called "strict-checkstyle.xml"
and
> > apply
> > >> > > > > > > > it per package. Once we enable it on
every package, we
> can
> > >> > > > > > > > merge it into the simple configuration.
> > >> > > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > > Best,
> > >> > > > > > > > tison.
> > >> > > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > > Enrico Olivelli <eolivelli@gmail.com>
于2019年6月29日周六
> > >> 下午2:19写道:
> > >> > > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > >> Il sab 29 giu 2019, 07:59 Zili Chen
<
> > wander4096@gmail.com>
> > >> ha
> > >> > > > > > scritto:
> > >> > > > > > > >>
> > >> > > > > > > >>> Thank you Enrico. It seems my
previous reply delivered
> > >> > > > > > > >>> into another thread. Repost
below.
> > >> > > > > > > >>>
> > >> > > > > > > >>> Hi zookeepers,
> > >> > > > > > > >>>
> > >> > > > > > > >>> I have proceeded ZOOKEEPER-3446
and been guided to
> here
> > >> > > > > > > >>> to discuss for a consensus before
any more efforts.
> > >> > > > > > > >>>
> > >> > > > > > > >>> In general, +1 on introducing
and forcing checkstyle.
> > >> > > > > > > >>>
> > >> > > > > > > >>> About the process, I agree that
we firstly reach a
> > >> consensus
> > >> > > > > > > >>> on the configuration and enable
it per package. In
> order
> > >> for
> > >> > > > > > > >>> our contributors to rebase as
few times as possible,
> > we'd
> > >> > > > > > > >>> better introduce all rules we
all agree on at once.
> Note
> > >> that
> > >> > > > > > > >>> we could always add rule if
someone ask for and agreed
> > by
> > >> the
> > >> > > > > > > >>> community.
> > >> > > > > > > >>>
> > >> > > > > > > >>> Currently, we turn on checkstyle
on all modules.
> > >> > > > > > > >>
> > >> > > > > > > >>
> > >> > > > > > > >> This is quite important because
we are using inlt in
> > order
> > >> to
> > >> > > > > prevent
> > >> > > > > > > >> @author tags.
> > >> > > > > > > >> This was part of the ant based precommit
job
> > >> > > > > > > >>
> > >> > > > > > > >> Enrico
> > >> > > > > > > >>
> > >> > > > > > > >>
> > >> > > > > > > >>
> > >> > > > > > > >>
> > >> > > > > > > >> Following the
> > >> > > > > > > >>> process above, we firstly turn
off it once we apply
> the
> > >> new
> > >> > > > > > > >>> configuration, and then turn
on it per package.
> > >> > > > > > > >>>
> > >> > > > > > > >>> If the community is willing
to do this work, a JIRA
> > about
> > >> the
> > >> > > new
> > >> > > > > > > >>> checkstyle configuration should
be filed and we
> continue
> > >> the
> > >> > > > > > discussion
> > >> > > > > > > >>> there. Generally, rules proposed
by Enrico are good
> > start
> > >> > point
> > >> > > > and
> > >> > > > > > > >>> I agree on we should not introduce
anything "fancy",
> but
> > >> > > > according
> > >> > > > > to
> > >> > > > > > > >>> what is actually needed.
> > >> > > > > > > >>>
> > >> > > > > > > >>> Best,
> > >> > > > > > > >>> tison.
> > >> > > > > > > >>>
> > >> > > > > > > >>>
> > >> > > > > > > >>> Enrico Olivelli <eolivelli@gmail.com>
于2019年6月29日周六
> > >> > 下午1:51写道:
> > >> > > > > > > >>>
> > >> > > > > > > >>>> @Zili Chen
> > >> > > > > > > >>>> This is the original email
thread. So you can answer
> > >> here.
> > >> > > > > > > >>>>
> > >> > > > > > > >>>> Enrico
> > >> > > > > > > >>>>
> > >> > > > > > > >>>> Il ven 28 giu 2019, 11:04
Norbert Kalmar
> > >> > > > > > <nkalmar@cloudera.com.invalid
> > >> > > > > > > >>>
> > >> > > > > > > >>> ha
> > >> > > > > > > >>>> scritto:
> > >> > > > > > > >>>>
> > >> > > > > > > >>>>> Community is eager to
jump on on this, we already
> have
> > >> pull
> > >> > > > > > requests
> > >> > > > > > > >>>>> cleaning up imports
:)
> > >> > > > > > > >>>>>
> > >> > > > > > > >>>>> First of all, sorry
for the late reply (I thought I
> > >> already
> > >> > > > > > answered
> > >> > > > > > > >>>> this,
> > >> > > > > > > >>>>> I remember reading it
and drawing up an answer. Oh
> > well)
> > >> > > > > > > >>>>>
> > >> > > > > > > >>>>> Some big patches are
already reviewed, I think we
> > should
> > >> > > commit
> > >> > > > > as
> > >> > > > > > > >> much
> > >> > > > > > > >>>> as
> > >> > > > > > > >>>>> possible before doing
this refactor. (I'll also try
> to
> > >> rev
> > >> > up
> > >> > > > my
> > >> > > > > > code
> > >> > > > > > > >>>>> review/commit thread)
> > >> > > > > > > >>>>>
> > >> > > > > > > >>>>> As for waiting for 3.6.0
- I don't see the reason we
> > >> > should.
> > >> > > > > Unless
> > >> > > > > > > >> of
> > >> > > > > > > >>>>> course this would delay
the release too much...
> > >> > > > > > > >>>>>
> > >> > > > > > > >>>>> I haven't checked HBase
checkstyle against our
> code, I
> > >> > don't
> > >> > > > > think
> > >> > > > > > we
> > >> > > > > > > >>>>> should introduce anything
"fancy". What Enrico
> listed
> > up
> > >> > > sounds
> > >> > > > > > like
> > >> > > > > > > >> a
> > >> > > > > > > >>>> good
> > >> > > > > > > >>>>> starting point.
> > >> > > > > > > >>>>>
> > >> > > > > > > >>>>> +1 on introducing and
forcing checkstyle.
> > >> > > > > > > >>>>>
> > >> > > > > > > >>>>> Regards,
> > >> > > > > > > >>>>> Norbert
> > >> > > > > > > >>>>>
> > >> > > > > > > >>>>>
> > >> > > > > > > >>>>> On Sun, Jun 23, 2019
at 7:27 PM Enrico Olivelli <
> > >> > > > > > eolivelli@gmail.com
> > >> > > > > > > >>>
> > >> > > > > > > >>>>> wrote:
> > >> > > > > > > >>>>>
> > >> > > > > > > >>>>>> Justin,
> > >> > > > > > > >>>>>> Thank you so much
for your help in this.
> > >> > > > > > > >>>>>>
> > >> > > > > > > >>>>>> I would suggest
to apply all of the rules in one
> > pass,
> > >> > > > splitting
> > >> > > > > > > >> the
> > >> > > > > > > >>>> work
> > >> > > > > > > >>>>>> per package.
> > >> > > > > > > >>>>>> This way reviews
will be easier, we will limit the
> > >> number
> > >> > of
> > >> > > > > > > >> commits
> > >> > > > > > > >>>> and
> > >> > > > > > > >>>>> we
> > >> > > > > > > >>>>>> won't annoy too
much the contributors , asking for
> > hard
> > >> > > > rebases
> > >> > > > > > > >>>>>>
> > >> > > > > > > >>>>>> This is how we did
it on Apache Bookkeeper
> > >> > > > > > > >>>>>> https://github.com/apache/bookkeeper/issues/230
> > >> > > > > > > >>>>>>
> > >> > > > > > > >>>>>> I will help review
and commit all of your patches,
> > it
> > >> > will
> > >> > > be
> > >> > > > > > > >>> mostly a
> > >> > > > > > > >>>>>> matter of code reformat
without any behavior
> change.
> > >> > > > > > > >>>>>> Currently I am doing
the same kind of work on
> others
> > >> > > projects
> > >> > > > of
> > >> > > > > > my
> > >> > > > > > > >>>>>> company, so I perfectly
know how the work will go.
> > >> > > > > > > >>>>>>
> > >> > > > > > > >>>>>> Before starting
we must ensure that:
> > >> > > > > > > >>>>>> 1) community is
willing to do this work (we will
> > force
> > >> a
> > >> > > > rebase
> > >> > > > > on
> > >> > > > > > > >>>> mostly
> > >> > > > > > > >>>>>> every pending PR)
> > >> > > > > > > >>>>>> 2) the proposed
configuration is accepted by the
> > >> community
> > >> > > > > > > >>>>>> 3) it is the good
time to do it, or should we wait
> > for
> > >> > 3.6.0
> > >> > > > to
> > >> > > > > be
> > >> > > > > > > >>> out
> > >> > > > > > > >>>>>>
> > >> > > > > > > >>>>>>
> > >> > > > > > > >>>>>> I see you are referring
to hbase checkstyle file,
> > did
> > >> > you
> > >> > > > > > already
> > >> > > > > > > >>>>> checked
> > >> > > > > > > >>>>>> how much different
it is from current project
> style?
> > >> > > > > > > >>>>>> Will we only need
to remove trailing spaces,
> reorder
> > >> > > members,
> > >> > > > > fix
> > >> > > > > > > >>>>> imports,
> > >> > > > > > > >>>>>> cut long lines ?
> > >> > > > > > > >>>>>>
> > >> > > > > > > >>>>>>
> > >> > > > > > > >>>>>> Cheers
> > >> > > > > > > >>>>>> Enrico
> > >> > > > > > > >>>>>>
> > >> > > > > > > >>>>>>
> > >> > > > > > > >>>>>>
> > >> > > > > > > >>>>>> Il dom 23 giu 2019,
15:11 Justin Ling Mao <
> > >> > > > > > > >> maoling199210191@sina.com
> > >> > > > > > > >>>>
> > >> > > > > > > >>>> ha
> > >> > > > > > > >>>>>> scritto:
> > >> > > > > > > >>>>>>
> > >> > > > > > > >>>>>>> Background:zookeeper-server
is the main-module of
> > the
> > >> zk
> > >> > > > > > > >> codebase.
> > >> > > > > > > >>>>>>> Unfortunately,
there were many checkstyle
> violations
> > >> in
> > >> > it.
> > >> > > > To
> > >> > > > > > > >>>> improve
> > >> > > > > > > >>>>>> the
> > >> > > > > > > >>>>>>> code quality
and code standards,
> > >> > > > > > > >>>>>>> IMHO, it's time
to clean up the all the checkstyle
> > >> > > > > > > >> violations(turn
> > >> > > > > > > >>> on
> > >> > > > > > > >>>>> the
> > >> > > > > > > >>>>>>> <failOnViolation>true</failOnViolation>).
we can
> > learn
> > >> > from
> > >> > > > the
> > >> > > > > > > >>> hbase
> > >> > > > > > > >>>>>> whose
> > >> > > > > > > >>>>>>> checkstyle(almost
40+ rules) is very strict and
> > >> ensures a
> > >> > > > very
> > >> > > > > > > >>>> unified
> > >> > > > > > > >>>>>> code
> > >> > > > > > > >>>>>>> style.(
> > >> > > > > > > >>>>>>>
> > >> > > > > > > >>>>>>
> > >> > > > > > > >>>>>
> > >> > > > > > > >>>>
> > >> > > > > > > >>>
> > >> > > > > > > >>
> > >> > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > >
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > >
> > >> > >
> > >> >
> > >>
> >
> https://github.com/apache/hbase/blob/master/hbase-checkstyle/src/main/resources/hbase/checkstyle.xml
> > >> > > > > > > >>>>>>> )
> > >> > > > > > > >>>>>>> My planing is:
clean up the all the checkstyle one
> > >> rule
> > >> > by
> > >> > > > > > > >> another
> > >> > > > > > > >>> to
> > >> > > > > > > >>>>>>> avoid too much
code changes for review.
> > >> > > > > > > >>>>>>> Everything's
hard in the beginning, I have fired
> my
> > >> first
> > >> > > > shot(
> > >> > > > > > > >>>>>>> https://github.com/apache/zookeeper/pull/992).
> > >> > > > > > > >>>>>>> If this draft
has accepted by the community, I
> will
> > >> > create
> > >> > > > the
> > >> > > > > > > >>>>>>> corresponding
sub-tasks for more people joining
> this
> > >> > work.
> > >> > > > > > > >>>>>>>
> > >> > > > > > > >>>>>>> Cited the comment
from Enrico Olivelli in the
> > >> > > > > > > >>>>>>>
> > >> > > > > > > >>>>>>
> > >> > > > > > > >>>>>
> > >> > > > > > > >>>>
> > >> > > > > > > >>>
> > >> > > > > > > >>
> > >> > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > >
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > >
> > >> > >
> > >> >
> > >>
> >
> ZOOKEEPER-3431:--------------------------------------------------------------we
> > >> > > > > > > >>>>>>> have to discuss
this topic with the community.I
> have
> > >> > > > experience
> > >> > > > > > > >> on
> > >> > > > > > > >>>>>>> BookKeeper,
we had to clean up groups of
> > >> packages.This is
> > >> > > the
> > >> > > > > > > >> kind
> > >> > > > > > > >>> of
> > >> > > > > > > >>>>>> stuff
> > >> > > > > > > >>>>>>> that invalidates
all of the pending pull
> requests.I
> > >> have
> > >> > > > > already
> > >> > > > > > > >>> sett
> > >> > > > > > > >>>>> up
> > >> > > > > > > >>>>>> a
> > >> > > > > > > >>>>>>> basic checkstyle
configuration file and it is
> > already
> > >> > > active
> > >> > > > > but
> > >> > > > > > > >> it
> > >> > > > > > > >>>> is
> > >> > > > > > > >>>>>>> performing only
very basic checks (like no
> 'author'
> > >> > tags).I
> > >> > > > > will
> > >> > > > > > > >>>>>> appreciate
> > >> > > > > > > >>>>>>> very much if
you want to drive this effort,
> > >> personally I
> > >> > > > would
> > >> > > > > > > >>> start
> > >> > > > > > > >>>>> this
> > >> > > > > > > >>>>>>> stuff after
3.6.0 release, once we consolidate
> > current
> > >> > > master
> > >> > > > > and
> > >> > > > > > > >>> the
> > >> > > > > > > >>>>>> maven
> > >> > > > > > > >>>>>>> build. I would
have sent an email on the dev@
> list
> > >> > soon.We
> > >> > > > > also
> > >> > > > > > > >>> have
> > >> > > > > > > >>>>> to
> > >> > > > > > > >>>>>>> agree on the
checkstyle configuration, it is not
> > >> > trivial, I
> > >> > > > > would
> > >> > > > > > > >>>> take
> > >> > > > > > > >>>>>> the
> > >> > > > > > > >>>>>>> file from HBase,
BookKeeper or other ASF projects
> on
> > >> the
> > >> > > > > Haddoop
> > >> > > > > > > >>>>>> ecosystem.
> > >> > > > > > > >>>>>>
> > >> > > > > > > >>>>>
> > >> > > > > > > >>>>
> > >> > > > > > > >>>
> > >> > > > > > > >>
> > >> > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > >
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > >
> > >> > >
> > >> >
> > >>
> > >>
> >
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message