Personally I like seeing all the issues on a per file level. I hate having to go in and
fix everything for one checker then reopen the same file to fix something else. I prefer
to handle them one file at a time.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Rafael Benevides" <benevides(a)redhat.com>
To: jdf-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2013 4:46:55 PM
Subject: Re: [jdf-dev] Quickstarts and Tooling Automation - Reporting
Hi all,
Today I worked with maven-report-plugin to generate the output of the
verification.
The source is here:
https://github.com/rafabene/qstools
I want your opinion on what's the best report layout ?
Layout Option 1
(grouped by checker them file)
CheckerName X
- file1.java
violation message
line 1
violation message
line 35
- file2.java
violation message
line 10
CheckerName Y
- file1.java
another violation message
line 3
- file2.java
another violation message
line 15
Layout Option 2
(grouped by file)
- file1.java
CheckerName X
violation message
line 1
CheckerName X
violation message
line 35
CheckerName Y
another violation message
3
- file2.java
CheckerName X
violation message
line 10
CheckerName Y
another violation message
line 15
Thanks for any comments.
Em 14/02/13 18:25, Rafael Benevides escreveu:
Hi all,
JDF is growing each day. As a consequence, keep the quickstarts
consistent is becoming a hard work.
To mitigate this and help the maintenance of the quickstart and also
to help the contributors to see if their quickstarts are ready to
review, we are planning and starting the development of a tooling
for quickstart automation.
This tool will make use of some other well know and opensource
projects like PMD (
pmd.sf.net), checkstyke (
checkstyle.sf.net),
Maven Enforcer plugin, etc to attend the following requirements:
* Validating quickstart POM files:
* Check for the License header ( checkstyle headers )
* Check for proper spacing and Indentation (try checkstyle -
whitespace rule and indentation rule )
* Check and verify if all quickstarts are using the
same/latest BOM versions
* Verify is it using the standard properties names (We will
provide the standard properties name)
* Check for non bom versions (and identify if we should
create a new BOM)
* Check javascript and css versions
* Check for duplicate properties and dependencies
* Check the pom.xml elements order
* Create scripts to update versions (quickstart, boms, etc)
* When a new quickstart is added, if it has a pom.xml file,
make sure the <module> is defined in one of the following
profiles: default, requires-postgres, complex-dependencies,
requires-full, requires-xts, non-maven.
* Validating quickstart README files:
* Check for the required metadata tags in README (Level,
Author, Target Product, etc)
* Verify the quickstart name in the README matches the folder
name and the project name
* Validating quickstart source code
* Check the quantity of comments in the code (evaluate PMD )
* General validation (desired):
* If a quickstart with a source other than the current
repository is modified, create an alert of some sort so we
can notify the upstream repository of the change.
* When we update a BOM property version in the quickstarts,
we need to make the same changes in the archetypes.
* Also, if there is a code fix in the kitchensink or
kitchensink-ear, we need to make the same fix in the
archetype code and check other quickstarts based on the same
archetype to see if they need the fixes applied.
If you have some comments, I will be glad to hear you.
Thanks
--
Rafael Benevides | Senior Software Engineer
Red Hat Brazil
+55-61-9269-6576
Better technology. Faster innovation. Powered by community
collaboration.
See how it works at
redhat.com
_______________________________________________
jdf-dev mailing list jdf-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jdf-dev
_______________________________________________
jdf-dev mailing list
jdf-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jdf-dev