> -----Original Message----- > From: Luc Maisonobe [mailto:luc.maison...@free.fr] > Sent: Friday, July 24, 2009 8:17 AM > To: Commons Developers List > Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Codec 1.4 based on RC2 > > Gary Gregory a écrit : > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: Luc Maisonobe [mailto:luc.maison...@free.fr] > >> Sent: Friday, July 24, 2009 5:40 AM > >> To: Commons Developers List > >> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Codec 1.4 based on RC2 > >> > >> Niall Pemberton a écrit : > >>> I have prepared a second release candidate for Codec 1.4 following the > >>> feedback (thanks!) from the first. > >>> > >>> [ ] +1 Yes go ahead an release based on RC2 > >> +1 > >> > >> A few findbugs and checkstyle warnings, but really minor ones. Seems to > >> have very complete testing, congratulations for that. > > > > The checkstyle warning complain about '+' starting a line instead of > ending them when building long strings. I used Eclipse (3.5) to format the > method, so our checkstyle are obviously different, which is fine. I am > just wondering why pick one vs. the other. I prefer to stick with stock > Eclipse settings for formatting this item. Thoughts?
Fixed source in svn. Merci Luc for the Eclipse pointer. G > > It is possible to adjust either checkstyle or eclipse to fold lines > either before or after operators. I think folding after operators is > what as been chosen in commons (at least it is the style in [math]) and > I have for myself set up eclipse to follow this convention > (preferences/java/code style/formatter, then line wrapping tab, then > open expressions/binary expressions and uncheck the wrap before operator > box at the bottom). The only discrepancy I have seen between checkstyle > and eclipse formatter is for "throws" statements in method declarations. > Eclipse format them one way and I often fix this manually to make > checkstyle happy. > > I have put an eclipse formatting xml file here: > <http://people.apache.org/~luc/Apache-commons.xml>, you can try to > import it in your eclipse configuration. If you improve it, let me know. > > Luc > > > > > Gary > > > >> Luc > >> > >> Luc > >> > >>> [ ] -1 No, because... > >>> > >>> The tag for RC2 is here: > >>> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/commons/proper/codec/tags/CODEC_1_4_RC2/ > >>> > >>> The release artefacts are here > >>> http://people.apache.org/~niallp/codec-1.4-rc2/ > >>> > >>> Site is available here: > >>> http://people.apache.org/~niallp/codec-1.4-rc2/site/ > >>> (note: some links are relative and will be broken until deployed to > >>> proper codec home) > >>> > >>> RAT Report: > >>> http://people.apache.org/~niallp/codec-1.4-rc2/site/rat-report.html > >>> > >>> CLIRR Report: > >>> http://people.apache.org/~niallp/codec-1.4-rc2/site/clirr-report.html > >>> > >>> Release Notes: > >>> http://people.apache.org/~niallp/codec-1.4-rc2/site/changes- > report.html > >>> http://people.apache.org/~niallp/codec-1.4-rc2/RELEASE-NOTES.txt > >>> > >>> Thanks > >>> > >>> Niall > >>> > >>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- > >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org > >>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org > >>> > >>> > >> > >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org > >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
