The "artifacts" task is not quite the same since it builds other things like docs, which significantly contributes to longer build time. I don't see why we couldn't add a new task that preserves the old behavior though, "fulljar" or something like that.
Kind Regards, Brandon On Mon, Jun 26, 2023 at 6:12 AM Jacek Lewandowski < lewandowski.ja...@gmail.com> wrote: > Yes, I've mentioned that there is a property we can set to skip checkstyle. > > Currently such a goal is "artifacts" which basically validates everything. > > > - - -- --- ----- -------- ------------- > Jacek Lewandowski > > > pon., 26 cze 2023 o 13:09 Mike Adamson <madam...@datastax.com> napisał(a): > >> While I like the idea of this because of added time these checks take, I >> was under the impression that checkstyle (at least) can be disabled with a >> flag. >> >> If we did do this, would it make sense to have a "release" or "commit" >> target (or some other name) that ran a full build with all checks that can >> be used prior to pushing changes? >> >> On Mon, 26 Jun 2023 at 08:35, Berenguer Blasi <berenguerbl...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> I would prefer sthg that is totally transparent to me and not add one >>> more step I have to remember. Just to push/run CI to find out I missed it >>> and rinse and repeat... With the recent fix to checkstyle I am happy as >>> things stand atm. My 2cts >>> On 26/6/23 8:43, Jacek Lewandowski wrote: >>> >>> Hi, >>> >>> >>> The context is that we currently have 3 checks in the build: >>> >>> - Checkstyle, >>> >>> - Eclipse-Warnings, >>> >>> - RAT >>> >>> >>> CheckStyle and RAT are executed with almost every target we run: build, >>> jar, test, test-some, testclasslist, etc.; on the other hand, >>> Eclipse-Warnings is executed automatically only with the artifacts target. >>> >>> >>> Checkstyle currently uses some caching, so subsequent reruns without >>> cleaning the project validate only the modified files. >>> >>> >>> Both CI - Jenkins and Circle forces running all checks. >>> >>> >>> I want to discuss whether you are ok with extracting all checks to their >>> distinct target and not running it automatically with the targets which >>> devs usually run locally. In particular: >>> >>> >>> >>> - "build", "jar", and all "test" targets would not trigger >>> CheckStyle, RAT or Eclipse-Warnings >>> - A new target "check" would trigger all CheckStyle, RAT, and >>> Eclipse-Warnings >>> - The new "check" target would be run along with the "artifacts" >>> target on Jenkins-CI, and it as a separate build step in CircleCI >>> >>> >>> The rationale for that change is: >>> >>> - Running all the checks together would be more consistent, but >>> running all of them automatically with build and test targets could waste >>> time when we develop something locally, frequently rebuilding and running >>> tests. >>> - On the other hand, it would be more consistent if the build did >>> what we want - as a dev, when prototyping, I don't want to be forced to >>> run >>> analysis (and potentially fix issues) whenever I want to build a project >>> or >>> just run a single test. >>> - There are ways to avoid running checks automatically by specifying >>> some build properties. Though, the discussion is about the default >>> behavior >>> - on the flip side, if one wants to run the checks along with the >>> specified >>> target, they could add the "check" target to the command line. >>> >>> >>> The rationale for keeping the checks running automatically with every >>> target is to reduce the likelihood of not running the checks locally before >>> pushing the branch and being surprised by failing CI soon after starting >>> the build. >>> >>> >>> That could be fixed by running checks in a pre-push Git hook. There are >>> some benefits of this compared to the current behavior: >>> >>> - the checks would be run automatically only once >>> - they would be triggered even for those devs who do everything in >>> IDE and do not even touch Ant commands directly >>> >>> >>> Checks can take time; to optimize that, they could be enforced locally >>> to verify only the modified files in the same way as we currently determine >>> the tests to be repeated for CircleCI. >>> >>> Thanks >>> - - -- --- ----- -------- ------------- >>> Jacek Lewandowski >>> >>> >> >> -- >> [image: DataStax Logo Square] <https://www.datastax.com/> *Mike Adamson* >> Engineering >> >> +1 650 389 6000 <16503896000> | datastax.com <https://www.datastax.com/> >> Find DataStax Online: [image: LinkedIn Logo] >> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.linkedin.com_company_datastax&d=DwMFaQ&c=adz96Xi0w1RHqtPMowiL2g&r=IFj3MdIKYLLXIUhYdUGB0cTzTlxyCb7_VUmICBaYilU&m=uHzE4WhPViSF0rsjSxKhfwGDU1Bo7USObSc_aIcgelo&s=akx0E6l2bnTjOvA-YxtonbW0M4b6bNg4nRwmcHNDo4Q&e=> >> [image: Facebook Logo] >> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.facebook.com_datastax&d=DwMFaQ&c=adz96Xi0w1RHqtPMowiL2g&r=IFj3MdIKYLLXIUhYdUGB0cTzTlxyCb7_VUmICBaYilU&m=uHzE4WhPViSF0rsjSxKhfwGDU1Bo7USObSc_aIcgelo&s=ncMlB41-6hHuqx-EhnM83-KVtjMegQ9c2l2zDzHAxiU&e=> >> [image: Twitter Logo] <https://twitter.com/DataStax> [image: RSS >> Feed] <https://www.datastax.com/blog/rss.xml> [image: Github Logo] >> <https://github.com/datastax> >> >>
