[jdf-dev] QSTools - Quickstarts tooling automation update to meet remote quickstarts

[Pete Muir]

Sounds good to me.

On 16 Jul 2013, at 01:51, Rafael Benevides <benevides at redhat.com> wrote:

> 
> Em 15/07/13 20:54, Sande Gilda escreveu:
>> 
>> On 07/15/2013 06:18 PM, Rafael Benevides wrote:
>>> Hi all, Sande and Pete,
>>> 
>>> One significant change in JDF Quickstarts repo is the use of git submodules to bring remote quickstarts to JDF. But... Sometimes remote quickstarts doesn't ( and don't want/need to ) follow JDF Contributing guide ( https://github.com/jboss-jdf/jboss-as-quickstart/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md ).
>>> 
>>> There are some requirements from QSTools ( https://docspace.corp.redhat.com/docs/DOC-132902 ) that I believe that we should update to split in two categories ( desired and mandatory ).
>>> 
>>> The definitions bellow are what I see differences across JBoss projects:
>>>  - package and groupId name (of course) - We already defined that using org.jboss.quickstarts.(eap|wfk|...) is optional from other Quickstarts (not JDF) but should be consistent within the product
>> Agreed. Could we define properties or some other type of file that could define the valid packages, groups, etc for each product?
> 
> Yes. That's Pete's suggestion. We could keep this definition file on QStools github repo. I thought in a yaml format to keep it.
> 
> Sande, Can you edit the QSTools requirement docspace to define what should be a "per product" Checker ? Nobody other than you is the best to provide this definition. I understand that what will not be a "per product" Checker, it should be a mandatory instruction.
> 
> With this in hand I can start a QSTools refactoring. I was wondering that a "per product" violation is a "warning" level violation and I'll sign it on QSTools report with a yellow color. In a mandatory violation I'll sign it with a red color. 
> 
> I'm trying to make QSTools a tooling to help us and it should be update as we need. But recently, the reported violations seems more a barrier than a gate.
> 
> Pete,
> 
> Any objections ?
>>>  - License Headers
>> Yes. We saw this with the Spring-based quickstarts that originate elsewhere. I'd still like to see this reported in case they are EAP quickstarts.
>>>  - Spacing and Indentation formats
>>> 
>> I don't see this as being something someone would object too. But maybe I'm wrong? Again, I'd still like to see this reported in case they are EAP quickstarts.
>> 
> One example: The Infinispan project is the one who uses a different format. They use 3-space for indentation.
> 
>>> What do you think? Is it it desired to be more or less restrictive for other quickstarts and also turn it in an automated pattern?
>>> 
>>> I'm bringing this discussion mainly because it is a recurrent discussion for remote projects like 
>>> - Infinispan: https://github.com/infinispan/jdg-quickstart/pull/20#issuecomment-20968520
>>> - GateIn: http://transcripts.jboss.org/channel/irc.freenode.org/%23jboss-jdf/2013/%23jboss-jdf.2013-06-21.log.html#t2013-06-21T13:39:31
>>> - And probable new others like BRMS, Fuse and Switchyard Quickstarts.
> - Adding Spring Quickstarts to the list :)
>>> 
>>> -- 
>>> 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 
>>> 
>> 
>