On 20 February 2012 09:10, Benedikt Ritter <b...@systemoutprintln.de> wrote: > Am 19.02.2012 22:57, schrieb Simone Tripodi: > >>> I think it is reasonable to have Commons wide defaults but let projects >>> override them if they want to. > > > I think that is, what Gary meant in the first place ;-) > http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/commons-dev/201202.mbox/%3C-662605764588844473%40unknownmsgid%3E > > To be honest, I'm really indifferent regarding what style to use. But I've > come to the conclusion, that coding style is an important thing for some of > you. I think the result of this discussion should be an easy way for > everyone to switch between components, even if some components are developed > by a few committers only (that is why I suggested to put the IDE > configuration files on the website).
If there were a single coding style that all present and future Commons committers could agree on, then it would make sense to make that the Commons style. However, the fact that we are having these discussions proves that there is no such style. Any style chosen today will necessarily depend on those voting at the time - at a later date, a different style will probably be chosen. Does it really make sense to change all the components to suit a style that is - not agreed by all at present - may become a minority style choice in future? == However, there may be some style aspects that we can agree on: - tabs are banned - indentation (Java = 4; xml = 2 or 4 ) I'm not sure there's anything else that has not been contentious at some point. > Regards, > Benedikt > > >> >> that is much more than reasonable, we are on the same path now! :) >> >> -Simo >> >> http://people.apache.org/~simonetripodi/ >> http://simonetripodi.livejournal.com/ >> http://twitter.com/simonetripodi >> http://www.99soft.org/ >> >> >> >> On Sun, Feb 19, 2012 at 10:49 PM, Ralph Goers<rgo...@apache.org> wrote: >>> >>> On Feb 19, 2012, at 12:26 PM, Simone Tripodi<simonetrip...@apache.org> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> While I agree that checkstyle has to be consistent inside each >>>> component, so I would be +1 on having the plugin in the parent (with >>>> PMD and Findbugs as mentioned by Gary), I am still reluctant with >>>> adopting a general checkstyle *configuration* for all components, and >>>> I make you a sample: commons-ognl. >>>> >>>> main OGNL contributors have been olamy, mcucchiara, grobmeier and >>>> >>>> simonetripodi<http://svnsearch.org/svnsearch/repos/ASF/search?path=%2Fcommons%2Fproper%2Fognl%2Ftrunk>. >>>> We all (except grobmeier :P) like the mvn style (brought by >>>> checkstyle-plugin) and we are comfortable on working with it. No one >>>> else committed on OGNL. >>>> So please explain me why the PMC should "force" OGNL guys on adopting >>>> a different style in a component where just a small subset of commons >>>> people (mainly Struts guys) is interested. >>>> >>>> Concluding: PMD, findbugs and checkstyle by default: +1; deciding >>>> which style has to be applied: -1. Good practice are one thing, strict >>>> rules are different. >>> >>> >>> I think it is reasonable to have Commons wide defaults but let projects >>> override them if they want to. >>> >>> Ralph >>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> 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
