On 13 March 2012 17:59, Gary Gregory <garydgreg...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Mar 13, 2012, at 12:40, Gilles Sadowski <gil...@harfang.homelinux.org> > wrote: > >> Hi. >> >>>> >>>>>> [...] >>>>>> >>>>>> The tools are there, but you have to tell people that they _must_ use >>>>>> them. >>>>> >>>>> Commons has already enough rules and process. As long as the releases >>>>> are have clean code I wouldn't be too anal about the commits in >>>>> between. >>>> >>>> I think that the main disagreement is here. Source code must be a clear >>>> read >>>> for the _developers_. To put it bluntly, I don't care that the releases >>>> have >>>> cleanly formatted code, as almost nobody is going to read those packaged >>>> sources! > > And another thing: the formatting /is/ important in released sources > because, again, this is what most users will see in their debuggers. > Have you seen some of the JRE sources? Some files are a mess, others > have blank lines in the middle of headers. Others look like they were > entered by a prisoner blinded in the noon day sun after spending a > month in the hole with bread and water ration and then given a stick > of butter for lunch.
No, that was a 'tab' of butter (which then sometimes got stuck into the source). > Gary > >>> >>> Nobody objects using Checkstyle. Personally I object a default >>> Checkstyle config, which everybody must override. Nearly every >>> components has specifics, so everybody MUST override. What if you >>> don't want to use Checkstyle? Can you disable it? >>> What, if you use Sun conventions and Maven conventions are the >>> default? Much work! Please leave the checkstyle question to where it >>> belongs, and this is not parent pom, but the individual component. >>> >>> And thats what I meant with: as long as we don't have a common >>> codestyle, i does not make much sense to have a common checkstyle >>> configuration. >> >> I thought that the question was whether to generate a CheckStyle report, not >> whether the configuration should be the same... >> >>> Secondly, I have not had the feeling in the past years that checkstyle >>> helped me so much (including non open source projects). And so far, my >>> code was readable. >> >> My code is also readable... >> >> I forgot to mention earlier in this thread that a code formatter will not >> detect missing comments; I've also seen that some people using IDE let the >> software generate totally useless "place-holder" Javadoc comments. Hence >> no tool can afterwards detect that documentation is missing. >> >> >> Regards, >> Gilles >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> 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
