Fundamentally no IDE will ever produce exactly the same code so you need to learn control your primal lust for perfection and remember it's not relevant. Have some decency ;) What does actually matter is that we don't keep chaging the order as it introduces conflicts on backporting, it's very annoying and time consuming in the long run. My solution is simple: I don't generally care, BUT commits containing code reformats just for the sake of making one's favourite tool happy need be rejected, especially to stop the bad habit from developing further, or anyone trying to impose its own favourite tool of the day as it was the only blessed way. It's fine if a couple of import reorg "slip in" as part as meaningful changes. The real problem is that applying a patch shouldn't conflict on import statements; ideally there should be a conflict resolution strategy able to understand it better (e.g. teach Java to git tools..) If you want to volunteer making the styles a bit more similar, I typically prefer static imports last. -1 for CheckStyle rules unless you can figure out a way to exclude existing code from failing: we're not going to reformat half the code base to satisfy aesthetics. Perhaps we could have separate sets of rules, some stricter to be applied on new modules; their impact would be limited but even having one module with strict rules would encourage people to reconfigure their IDE in "the right way". This would ensure all new code will be consistent with the rules. Sergey sent a related PR but I'm not sure what to think of it as it changes several things: - https://github.com/hibernate/hibernate-ide-codestyles/pull/3 Thanks, Sanne On 12 September 2017 at 08:42, Yoann Rodiere <yoann(a)hibernate.org&gt; wrote: > Hello all, > > I just noticed that our IDEA codestyle configuration files have specific > rules about how to organize imports, whereas the Eclipse ones don't. > The most noticeable difference: organizing imports in Eclipse puts static > imports at the top, while in IDEA they end up at the bottom. But there are > other differences. > The Hibernate ORM codebase doesn't seem affected by these inconsistencies > (probably because most people working on it use IDEA), but in Hibernate > Search we've already reached the point where half of our files follow one > convention, and the other half follows the other. > > What's annoying here is not the inconsistencies themselves (I could live > with that), it's more that in the long run we'll end up with tons of > unnecessary changes in our commits, due to one person using IDEA to edit a > file last edited with Eclipse, and vice-versa. > > To make the matter worse, Eclipse is not as flexible as IDEA, and we cannot > configure Eclipse to match the IDEA style exactly. In particular, we cannot > configure where the static imports must go: they will always go to the top ( > https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=304415). > > I can see two ways out, each with its own drawbacks: > > - Switch to the "Eclipse" style, and create a Search-specific IDEA code > style configuration, with static imports at the top. We won't be consistent > with Hibernate ORM, though. > - Switch to the "IDEA" style, and create a Search-specific Eclipse code > style configuration, as close as the IDEA style as possible. As I said > above, automatic import organizing in Eclipse will never follow this style > exactly, so it's likely to make organizing imports in Eclipse quite > painful. We could add checkstyle rules to make sure we strictly follow the > style even in Eclipse. > > WDYT? > > > Yoann Rodière > Hibernate NoORM Team > yoann(a)hibernate.org > _______________________________________________ > hibernate-dev mailing list > hibernate-dev(a)lists.jboss.org > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev _______________________________________________ hibernate-dev mailing list hibernate-dev(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev

> Fundamentally no IDE will ever produce exactly the same code so you > need to learn control your primal lust for perfection and remember > it's not relevant. Have some decency ;) Sorry if that seemed "indecent", but I did mention that I could live with the inconsistencies, and that what matters is their effect on our git workflow :) > If you want to volunteer making the styles a bit more similar, I > typically prefer static imports last. Sure... thing is you can't do that in Eclipse, as I mentioned. I'll try to align the rest of the rules, though. > Sergey sent a related PR but I'm not sure what to think of it as it > changes several things: > - https://github.com/hibernate/hibernate-ide-codestyles/pull/3 Yes, it does more than what it advertises, and even the original idea (putting static imports to the top) is not a good idea: ORM already has static imports at the bottom in almost every file, so this change would lead to many more changes than necessary in commits for the ORM project for some time. > I would say that it would be nice to have Eclipse and Idea rules as > similar as possible. The issue with that is that, for a while, the ORM > people will have a lot of import changes, considering we can't make the > Eclipse rules Idea like but we can do the opposite. I doubt they'll ever agree with this solution. And I can't blame them. > If we don't want to bother the ORM team with that, we should split our > rules between ORM and NoORM but it won't be very underestandable for the > contributors (but it's not as if we had a lot of them and very few of them > find our code styles without us mentioning them). Seems to be the least disruptive solution. It's not ideal, but it should improve the situation slightly and it wouldn't lead to more changes than necessary in the future git commits. @Sanne this means the imports will stay at the top, though. Ok with that?

I'll try to see if I can add non-disruptive checkstyle rules too, if I have some time. Yoann Rodière Hibernate NoORM Team yoann(a)hibernate.org On 12 September 2017 at 11:31, Guillaume Smet <guillaume.smet(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote: > > Hi, > > Yes, I had a hard time reverting the import changes in my recent patches > for ORM. I was changing only a few lines per file and had a lot of import > noise. > > I would say that it would be nice to have Eclipse and Idea rules as > similar as possible. The issue with that is that, for a while, the ORM > people will have a lot of import changes, considering we can't make the > Eclipse rules Idea like but we can do the opposite. > > If we don't want to bother the ORM team with that, we should split our > rules between ORM and NoORM but it won't be very underestandable for the > contributors (but it's not as if we had a lot of them and very few of them > find our code styles without us mentioning them). > > -- > Guillaume > > > On Tue, Sep 12, 2017 at 11:13 AM, Sanne Grinovero <sanne(a)hibernate.org&gt; > wrote: >> >> Fundamentally no IDE will ever produce exactly the same code so you >> need to learn control your primal lust for perfection and remember >> it's not relevant. Have some decency ;) >> >> What does actually matter is that we don't keep chaging the order as >> it introduces conflicts on backporting, it's very annoying and time >> consuming in the long run. >> >> My solution is simple: I don't generally care, BUT commits containing >> code reformats just for the sake of making one's favourite tool happy >> need be rejected, especially to stop the bad habit from developing >> further, or anyone trying to impose its own favourite tool of the day >> as it was the only blessed way. >> It's fine if a couple of import reorg "slip in" as part as meaningful >> changes. >> >> The real problem is that applying a patch shouldn't conflict on import >> statements; ideally there should be a conflict resolution strategy >> able to understand it better (e.g. teach Java to git tools..) >> >> If you want to volunteer making the styles a bit more similar, I >> typically prefer static imports last. >> >> -1 for CheckStyle rules unless you can figure out a way to exclude >> existing code from failing: we're not going to reformat half the code >> base to satisfy aesthetics. >> >> Perhaps we could have separate sets of rules, some stricter to be >> applied on new modules; their impact would be limited but even having >> one module with strict rules would encourage people to reconfigure >> their IDE in "the right way". This would ensure all new code will be >> consistent with the rules. >> >> Sergey sent a related PR but I'm not sure what to think of it as it >> changes several things: >> - https://github.com/hibernate/hibernate-ide-codestyles/pull/3 >> >> Thanks, >> Sanne >> >> >> >> On 12 September 2017 at 08:42, Yoann Rodiere <yoann(a)hibernate.org&gt; wrote: >> > Hello all, >> > >> > I just noticed that our IDEA codestyle configuration files have >> > specific >> > rules about how to organize imports, whereas the Eclipse ones don't. >> > The most noticeable difference: organizing imports in Eclipse puts >> > static >> > imports at the top, while in IDEA they end up at the bottom. But there >> > are >> > other differences. >> > The Hibernate ORM codebase doesn't seem affected by these >> > inconsistencies >> > (probably because most people working on it use IDEA), but in Hibernate >> > Search we've already reached the point where half of our files follow >> > one >> > convention, and the other half follows the other. >> > >> > What's annoying here is not the inconsistencies themselves (I could >> > live >> > with that), it's more that in the long run we'll end up with tons of >> > unnecessary changes in our commits, due to one person using IDEA to >> > edit a >> > file last edited with Eclipse, and vice-versa. >> > >> > To make the matter worse, Eclipse is not as flexible as IDEA, and we >> > cannot >> > configure Eclipse to match the IDEA style exactly. In particular, we >> > cannot >> > configure where the static imports must go: they will always go to the >> > top ( >> > https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=304415). >> > >> > I can see two ways out, each with its own drawbacks: >> > >> > - Switch to the "Eclipse" style, and create a Search-specific IDEA >> > code >> > style configuration, with static imports at the top. We won't be >> > consistent >> > with Hibernate ORM, though. >> > - Switch to the "IDEA" style, and create a Search-specific Eclipse >> > code >> > style configuration, as close as the IDEA style as possible. As I >> > said >> > above, automatic import organizing in Eclipse will never follow this >> > style >> > exactly, so it's likely to make organizing imports in Eclipse quite >> > painful. We could add checkstyle rules to make sure we strictly >> > follow the >> > style even in Eclipse. >> > >> > WDYT? >> > >> > >> > Yoann Rodière >> > Hibernate NoORM Team >> > yoann(a)hibernate.org >> > _______________________________________________ >> > hibernate-dev mailing list >> > hibernate-dev(a)lists.jboss.org >> > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev >> >> _______________________________________________ >> hibernate-dev mailing list >> hibernate-dev(a)lists.jboss.org >> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev > >

Well, if you don't mind me sending PRs with those imports in a different order next time I change the file (because I don't spend time on organizing imports manually, I just use CTRL+SHIFT+O), then yes, we can leave that undefined.

Yoann Rodière Hibernate NoORM Team yoann(a)hibernate.org On 12 September 2017 at 11:45, Sanne Grinovero <sanne(a)hibernate.org&gt; wrote: > > On 12 September 2017 at 10:42, Yoann Rodiere <yoann(a)hibernate.org&gt; wrote: > >> Fundamentally no IDE will ever produce exactly the same code so you > >> need to learn control your primal lust for perfection and remember > >> it's not relevant. Have some decency ;) > > > > > > Sorry if that seemed "indecent", but I did mention that I could live > > with > > the inconsistencies, and that what matters is their effect on our git > > workflow :) > > > >> If you want to volunteer making the styles a bit more similar, I > >> typically prefer static imports last. > > > > > > Sure... thing is you can't do that in Eclipse, as I mentioned. I'll try > > to > > align the rest of the rules, though. > > > >> Sergey sent a related PR but I'm not sure what to think of it as it > >> changes several things: > >> - https://github.com/hibernate/hibernate-ide-codestyles/pull/3 > > > > > > Yes, it does more than what it advertises, and even the original idea > > (putting static imports to the top) is not a good idea: ORM already has > > static imports at the bottom in almost every file, so this change would > > lead > > to many more changes than necessary in commits for the ORM project for > > some > > time. > > > >> I would say that it would be nice to have Eclipse and Idea rules as > >> similar as possible. The issue with that is that, for a while, the ORM > >> people will have a lot of import changes, considering we can't make the > >> Eclipse rules Idea like but we can do the opposite. > > > > > > I doubt they'll ever agree with this solution. And I can't blame them. > > > >> If we don't want to bother the ORM team with that, we should split our > >> rules between ORM and NoORM but it won't be very underestandable for > >> the > >> contributors (but it's not as if we had a lot of them and very few of > >> them > >> find our code styles without us mentioning them). > > > > > > Seems to be the least disruptive solution. It's not ideal, but it should > > improve the situation slightly and it wouldn't lead to more changes than > > necessary in the future git commits. > > @Sanne this means the imports will stay at the top, though. Ok with > > that? > > Yes I'm "ok" with that. But wouldn't it be even better to leave this > level of detail undefined? > > At least it would allow me to make new code having them on the bottom > as I like them more, and you'd save some itme :) > > > > > I'll try to see if I can add non-disruptive checkstyle rules too, if I > > have > > some time. > > > > Yoann Rodière > > Hibernate NoORM Team > > yoann(a)hibernate.org > > > > On 12 September 2017 at 11:31, Guillaume Smet <guillaume.smet(a)gmail.com&gt; > > wrote: > >> > >> Hi, > >> > >> Yes, I had a hard time reverting the import changes in my recent > >> patches > >> for ORM. I was changing only a few lines per file and had a lot of > >> import > >> noise. > >> > >> I would say that it would be nice to have Eclipse and Idea rules as > >> similar as possible. The issue with that is that, for a while, the ORM > >> people will have a lot of import changes, considering we can't make the > >> Eclipse rules Idea like but we can do the opposite. > >> > >> If we don't want to bother the ORM team with that, we should split our > >> rules between ORM and NoORM but it won't be very underestandable for > >> the > >> contributors (but it's not as if we had a lot of them and very few of > >> them > >> find our code styles without us mentioning them). > >> > >> -- > >> Guillaume > >> > >> > >> On Tue, Sep 12, 2017 at 11:13 AM, Sanne Grinovero <sanne(a)hibernate.org&gt; > >> wrote: > >>> > >>> Fundamentally no IDE will ever produce exactly the same code so you > >>> need to learn control your primal lust for perfection and remember > >>> it's not relevant. Have some decency ;) > >>> > >>> What does actually matter is that we don't keep chaging the order as > >>> it introduces conflicts on backporting, it's very annoying and time > >>> consuming in the long run. > >>> > >>> My solution is simple: I don't generally care, BUT commits containing > >>> code reformats just for the sake of making one's favourite tool happy > >>> need be rejected, especially to stop the bad habit from developing > >>> further, or anyone trying to impose its own favourite tool of the day > >>> as it was the only blessed way. > >>> It's fine if a couple of import reorg "slip in" as part as meaningful > >>> changes. > >>> > >>> The real problem is that applying a patch shouldn't conflict on import > >>> statements; ideally there should be a conflict resolution strategy > >>> able to understand it better (e.g. teach Java to git tools..) > >>> > >>> If you want to volunteer making the styles a bit more similar, I > >>> typically prefer static imports last. > >>> > >>> -1 for CheckStyle rules unless you can figure out a way to exclude > >>> existing code from failing: we're not going to reformat half the code > >>> base to satisfy aesthetics. > >>> > >>> Perhaps we could have separate sets of rules, some stricter to be > >>> applied on new modules; their impact would be limited but even having > >>> one module with strict rules would encourage people to reconfigure > >>> their IDE in "the right way". This would ensure all new code will be > >>> consistent with the rules. > >>> > >>> Sergey sent a related PR but I'm not sure what to think of it as it > >>> changes several things: > >>> - https://github.com/hibernate/hibernate-ide-codestyles/pull/3 > >>> > >>> Thanks, > >>> Sanne > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> On 12 September 2017 at 08:42, Yoann Rodiere <yoann(a)hibernate.org&gt; > >>> wrote: > >>> > Hello all, > >>> > > >>> > I just noticed that our IDEA codestyle configuration files have > >>> > specific > >>> > rules about how to organize imports, whereas the Eclipse ones don't. > >>> > The most noticeable difference: organizing imports in Eclipse puts > >>> > static > >>> > imports at the top, while in IDEA they end up at the bottom. But > >>> > there > >>> > are > >>> > other differences. > >>> > The Hibernate ORM codebase doesn't seem affected by these > >>> > inconsistencies > >>> > (probably because most people working on it use IDEA), but in > >>> > Hibernate > >>> > Search we've already reached the point where half of our files > >>> > follow > >>> > one > >>> > convention, and the other half follows the other. > >>> > > >>> > What's annoying here is not the inconsistencies themselves (I could > >>> > live > >>> > with that), it's more that in the long run we'll end up with tons of > >>> > unnecessary changes in our commits, due to one person using IDEA to > >>> > edit a > >>> > file last edited with Eclipse, and vice-versa. > >>> > > >>> > To make the matter worse, Eclipse is not as flexible as IDEA, and we > >>> > cannot > >>> > configure Eclipse to match the IDEA style exactly. In particular, we > >>> > cannot > >>> > configure where the static imports must go: they will always go to > >>> > the > >>> > top ( > >>> > https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=304415). > >>> > > >>> > I can see two ways out, each with its own drawbacks: > >>> > > >>> > - Switch to the "Eclipse" style, and create a Search-specific > >>> > IDEA > >>> > code > >>> > style configuration, with static imports at the top. We won't be > >>> > consistent > >>> > with Hibernate ORM, though. > >>> > - Switch to the "IDEA" style, and create a Search-specific > >>> > Eclipse > >>> > code > >>> > style configuration, as close as the IDEA style as possible. As I > >>> > said > >>> > above, automatic import organizing in Eclipse will never follow > >>> > this > >>> > style > >>> > exactly, so it's likely to make organizing imports in Eclipse > >>> > quite > >>> > painful. We could add checkstyle rules to make sure we strictly > >>> > follow the > >>> > style even in Eclipse. > >>> > > >>> > WDYT? > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > Yoann Rodière > >>> > Hibernate NoORM Team > >>> > yoann(a)hibernate.org > >>> > _______________________________________________ > >>> > hibernate-dev mailing list > >>> > hibernate-dev(a)lists.jboss.org > >>> > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev > >>> > >>> _______________________________________________ > >>> hibernate-dev mailing list > >>> hibernate-dev(a)lists.jboss.org > >>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev > >> > >> > >