I am in favor of Google vanilla code style. As far as I followed the discussion there will be no style that everybody loves, but most people agree that there should be a unique style. Thus, adjusting Google style does not give any benefits.
-Matthias On 10/20/2015 03:36 PM, Stephan Ewen wrote: > +1 for introducing a stricter style guide and starting with the Google > style. > > Should we have a separate discussion whether we take the Google style guide > vanilla, or whether we make slight adjustments? > > On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 3:26 PM, Till Rohrmann <trohrm...@apache.org> wrote: > >> That's how I've understood Ufuk's mail. Everyone should also be aware that >> the Google code style limits the number characters per line to either 80 or >> 100. But I guess that everyone will read it himself. >> >> On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 3:15 PM, Stephan Ewen <se...@apache.org> wrote: >> >>> Just checking: Do we take Google's style guide as is, including spaces >>> instead of tabs? I like the spaces, but that will make things hard... >>> >>> On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 3:01 PM, Gyula Fóra <gyula.f...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >>> >>>> +1 for both :) >>>> >>>> Till Rohrmann <trohrm...@apache.org> ezt írta (időpont: 2015. okt. >> 20., >>> K, >>>> 14:58): >>>> >>>>> I like the idea to have a bit stricter code style which will increase >>>> code >>>>> maintainability and makes it easier for people to go through the >> code. >>>>> Furthermore, it will relieve us from code style comments while >>> reviewing >>>>> PRs which can be quite cumbersome. >>>>> >>>>> Personally, I like the Google code style. Thus, +1 for both points. >>>>> >>>>> Just a remark: We should discuss the same for Flink's Scala style at >>> some >>>>> point. >>>>> >>>>> On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 2:54 PM, Márton Balassi < >>>> balassi.mar...@gmail.com> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> +1 for both >>>>>> >>>>>> As we are planning to restructure the maven projects at the point >>> that >>>>>> breaks the PRs anyway, so going on step further at this point in >> time >>>> is >>>>>> reasonable for me. >>>>>> >>>>>> On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 2:37 PM, Matthias J. Sax <mj...@apache.org >>> >>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> big +1 for both! >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On 10/20/2015 02:31 PM, Ufuk Celebi wrote: >>>>>>>> DISCLAIMER: This is not my personal idea, but a community >>>> discussion >>>>>> from >>>>>>>> some time ago. Don't kill the messenger. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> In March we were discussing issues with heterogeneity of the >> code >>>>> [1]. >>>>>>> The >>>>>>>> summary is that we had a consensus to enforce a stricter code >>> style >>>>> on >>>>>>> our >>>>>>>> Java code base in order to make it easier to switch between >>>> projects >>>>>> and >>>>>>> to >>>>>>>> have clear rules for new contributions. The main proposal in >> the >>>> last >>>>>>>> discussion was to go with Google's Java code style. Not all >> were >>>>> fully >>>>>>>> satisfied with this, but still everyone agreed on some kind of >>>> style. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I think the upcoming 0.10 release is a good point to finally go >>>>> through >>>>>>>> with these changes (right after the release/branch-off). >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I propose to go with Google's Java code style [2] as proposed >>>>> earlier. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> PROs: >>>>>>>> - Clear style guide available >>>>>>>> - Tooling like checkstyle rules, IDE plugins already available >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> CONs: >>>>>>>> - Fully breaks our current style >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> The main problem with this will be open pull requests, which >> will >>>> be >>>>>>> harder >>>>>>>> to merge after all the changes. On the other hand, should pull >>>>> requests >>>>>>>> that have been open for a long time block this? Most of the >>>> important >>>>>>>> changes will be merged for the release anyways. I think in the >>> long >>>>> run >>>>>>> we >>>>>>>> will gain more than we loose by this (more homogenous code, >> clear >>>>>> rules). >>>>>>>> And it is questionable whether we will ever be able to do such >> a >>>>> change >>>>>>> in >>>>>>>> the future if we cannot do it now. The project will most likely >>>> grow >>>>>> and >>>>>>>> attract more contributors, at which point it will be even >> harder >>> to >>>>> do. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Please make sure to answer the following points in the >>> discussion: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> 1) Are you (still) in favour of enforcing stricter rules on the >>>> Java >>>>>>>> codebase? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> 2) If yes, would you be OK with the Google's Java code style? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> – Ufuk >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> [1] >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/flink-dev/201503.mbox/%3ccanc1h_von0b5omnwzxchtyzwhakeghbzvquyk7s9o2a36b8...@mail.gmail.com%3e >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> [2] https://google.github.io/styleguide/javaguide.html >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >> >
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
