2013/1/9 Phil Steitz <phil.ste...@gmail.com>: > On 1/9/13 7:14 AM, Olivier Lamy wrote: >> What about having a reporting profile (enabled per default). >> And using -DskipReports to not generated cobertura, findbugs etc.. >> >> Perso I like this idea as currently when you want to test a typo fix >> in a .apt or .xdoc it's very long to generate the site only for a typo >> fix in documentation. > > Agreed. Back in the very old m1 days, you could do something like > "maven xdoc" to just gen the xdoc-based html. Is there a m2 way to > do this? nope or I don't know this feature.
> > Phil >> >> 2013/1/9 Gilles Sadowski <gil...@harfang.homelinux.org>: >>> On Wed, Jan 09, 2013 at 08:37:33AM -0500, Gary Gregory wrote: >>>> On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 8:11 AM, Gilles Sadowski < >>>> gil...@harfang.homelinux.org> wrote: >>>> >>>>> On Wed, Jan 09, 2013 at 07:25:45AM -0500, Gary Gregory wrote: >>>>>> IMO code coverage should be part of the standard documentation for a >>>>>> component. Looking at code coverage helps establish or shake my >>>>>> confidence in a component. It should definitively be part of ones >>>>>> development checklist, I like to have the best code coverage for any >>>>>> new code that I check in. >>>>>> >>>>>> Gary >>>>>> >>>>>> On Jan 9, 2013, at 5:16, Olivier Lamy <ol...@apache.org> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Hi Folks, >>>>>>> I have started importing some content for sub projects (exec, >>>>>>> collections). I will try to do more later. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Where is the place to document that ? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Note: currently some content is imported which could be removed (I >>>>>>> think about cobertura for modules which use sonar). >>>>>>> >>>>>>> What is the status about moving cobertura to a dedicated profile in >>>>>>> parent pom ? >>>>>>> Can I move it to a reporting profile in parent pom ? >>>>>>> >>>>> For [Math] it would be much better (since AFAIK nobody came up with a way >>>>> to >>>>> disable Cobertura on a per-component basis). >>>>> >>>>> From what I infer from looking at the Sonar report page, we could have the >>>>> best of all worlds if every Commons project were registered indepently in >>>>> Sonar. Currently, there is one "Commons Proper Aggregator Project >>>>> 1.0-SNAPSHOT" (which does not represent the actual situation that the >>>>> components are independent from each other). However, it seems that with >>>>> several projects registered, it could be possible to compare two versions >>>>> of the same project, thereby providing complete information on the >>>>> evolution >>>>> of the code. Am I wrong? >>>>> >>>> Sonar has no value for local development though (before you commit). I need >>>> the reports to run locally when, for example, I am improving code coverage, >>>> fixing FindBugs, PMD, and Checkstyle issues. >>> Nothing will prevent you to run Cobertura by calling the new profile >>> explicitly. We've explained that Cobertura is a PITA for Commons Math >>> developers. >>> >>> >>> Thanks, >>> 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 > -- Olivier Lamy Talend: http://coders.talend.com http://twitter.com/olamy | http://linkedin.com/in/olamy --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
