[aerogear-dev] checkstyle on aerogear-parent

[Karel Piwko]

That's not true, it was discussed during team meeting at
the times we've been using G+ as well (I can't prove that) and on ML as well:

http://aerogear-dev.1069024.n5.nabble.com/aerogear-dev-JavaScript-formatter-td5200.html

It just took 7 month for the PR to be merged. The point of initial checkstyle
rules set was chosen because:

* It was identified as the least annoying setup on ML, there were a lot of +1s
* There was a bug in released library caused by using unused import that was not
  available on classpath. I might be able to dig it out but it would take me a
  lot of time as I don't recall what project it was.

+9001 for abstract's proposal on having same setup for IDE as well. There is
nothing more annoying then something working in IDE but not in Maven. -1 for the
specific profile, as it shifts responsibility to clean up the mess to the person
doing the release.

Karel

On Tue, 20 May 2014 16:20:52 -0300
Bruno Oliveira <bruno at abstractj.org> wrote:

> The only reason to have checkstyle enabled by default is: if we agree on
> which rules should be active or not and provide an specific IDE setup.
> 
> Other than that, people like me will skip it. Why? Simple, I'm trying to
> solve critical problems and also strugging to figure out why checkstyle
> is do care about method lenght.
> 
> So to me if you're guys really want to introduce it we need:
> 
> - Definition of which rules were supposed to be active
> - IDE profiles for Eclipse/IntelliJ
> - Make the error messages something clear
> 
> Otherwise, I'm -∞. It was never discussed here and if it exists on
> aerogear-parent is all our fault.
> 
> On 2014-05-20, Daniel Bevenius wrote:
> > -1 I'd prefer to have checkstyle enabled by default, and integrate the
> > checkstyle into the IDE to avoid having to discover issue later when
> > building with maven.
> >
> >
> > On 20 May 2014 20:56, Bruno Oliveira <bruno at abstractj.org> wrote:
> >
> > > +1 on having an specific profile for checkstyle
> > >
> > > On 2014-05-20, Matthias Wessendorf wrote:
> > > > Hello,
> > > >
> > > > w/ the advent of the 0.2.0 parent, we have checkstyle enabled;
> > > >
> > > > However, I am not that happy, as the default rules are IMO a bit odd
> > > (e.g.
> > > > the unused imports is pretty nasty when developing)
> > > >
> > > > We could:
> > > > a) get rid of it (perhaps not)
> > > > b) disable it on normal execution and only execute it on a release
> > > profile
> > > > or like that
> > > >
> > > > right now I am running w/ skip - but that's a bit nasty...
> > > >
> > > > Thoughts?
> > > > Matthias
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Matthias Wessendorf
> > > >
> > > > blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
> > > > sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
> > > > twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf
> > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > aerogear-dev mailing list
> > > > aerogear-dev at lists.jboss.org
> > > > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > >
> > > abstractj
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > aerogear-dev mailing list
> > > aerogear-dev at lists.jboss.org
> > > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev
> > >
> 
> > _______________________________________________
> > aerogear-dev mailing list
> > aerogear-dev at lists.jboss.org
> > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev
> 
> 
> --
> 
> abstractj
> _______________________________________________
> aerogear-dev mailing list
> aerogear-dev at lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev