Filed https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-7985 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-7985> [1].
> On 18 Mar 2018, at 00:56, Dmitry Pavlov <dpavlov....@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hello Petr, > > Many members of the community would appreciate such additional code control, > and it's a pity that no one made this happen. Agree? > > Could you please pick up this activity? > > It might be an idea to create 'IDEA Inspections' step to be run in parallel > with 'Build Apache Ignite'. WDYT? Would it work? > > Sincerely, > Dmitriy Pavlov > > https://confluence.jetbrains.com/display/TCD10/Inspections > <https://confluence.jetbrains.com/display/TCD10/Inspections> > > > пн, 12 мар. 2018 г. в 14:37, Dmitry Pavlov <dpavlov....@gmail.com > <mailto:dpavlov....@gmail.com>>: > Hi Dmitriy, > > would you pick up this activity? > > Sincerely, > Dmitriy Pavlov > > вт, 6 мар. 2018 г. в 14:09, Dmitry Pavlov <dpavlov....@gmail.com > <mailto:dpavlov....@gmail.com>>: > What I can suggest now it is to take XML file with existing as is from > previous topic (I remember someone in community already prepared settings) > and set up TeamCity Run configuration as part of Run All Basic Tests (per > commit basis). > > If we don’t have XML, I suggest to enable build-in Idea inspections 'as is' > on TeamCity and iteratively improve it according to found issues. > > Dmitriy G., would you prepare PR and proof-of-concept TC run configuration? > > As discussion became really active, I think that means community is > interested in static code checks. > > вт, 6 мар. 2018 г. в 14:08, Dmitry Pavlov <dpavlov....@gmail.com > <mailto:dpavlov....@gmail.com>>: > I was thinking about some quick check, which will automatically require > minimum runs. Now, any committer can push changes to the master, which break > not only the inspection and style, but even the compilation. If this control > would be automatic, it can allow us make codebase better quite fast. But I am > afraid it is not realistic. > > > > вт, 6 мар. 2018 г. в 13:42, Petr Ivanov <mr.wei...@gmail.com > <mailto:mr.wei...@gmail.com>>: > Sonar is powerful, yes, but it’s power in thoroughness. I.e. it does its job > well in cases of leisurely post-build analysis. > > I’d suggest we use it (if we will use it) in the following scenarios: > — some basic checks Sonar profile for Blocker bugs (it is fast) — something > that cannot be passed to master; > — nightly or even weekly run with Full Sonar profile (600+ checks from > Firebug, Codestyle, Coverage, etc.) for regression and overall code quality > improvement goals. > > Did not quite get you about push-to-master prohibition. Can you explain > scenario in more details? > > > > On 6 Mar 2018, at 13:27, Dmitry Pavlov <dpavlov....@gmail.com > > <mailto:dpavlov....@gmail.com>> wrote: > > > > Petr, I've heard Sonar is powerful tool. > > > > Would it help us to prohibit commits to master w/o test run / too much > > failed tests / too much inspection errors appeared? > > > > вт, 6 мар. 2018 г. в 13:22, Alexey Goncharuk <alexey.goncha...@gmail.com > > <mailto:alexey.goncha...@gmail.com>>: > > > >> Dmitriy, > >> > >> I like this idea a lot. For example, the inspection profile should have > >> inspection 'Anonymous class can be converted to lambda' disabled because > >> quite a lot of such classes can be sent over the network (although even > >> anonymous classes are discourage for such purposes). > >> > >> I believe we can start with sharing somehow one of the profiles and then > >> iteratively improving it until the community is satisfied with the result. > >> > >> Thoughts? > >> > >> 2018-03-06 12:06 GMT+03:00 Petr Ivanov <mr.wei...@gmail.com > >> <mailto:mr.wei...@gmail.com>>: > >> > >>> We can use Sonar as instrument for code analysis and test coverage > >>> inspections. > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>>> On 6 Mar 2018, at 11:28, Dmitriy Govorukhin < > >>> dmitriy.govoruk...@gmail.com <mailto:dmitriy.govoruk...@gmail.com>> wrote: > >>>> > >>>> Dmitriy, > >>>> > >>>> As I understood, preview topic was of static code analysis in general. > >>>> In this topic, I want to discuss only idea inspection rule. > >>>> In future, of course, we can expаnd this rule to the TeamCity build. > >>>> > >>>> On Tue, Mar 6, 2018 at 11:16 AM, Nikolay Izhikov <nizhi...@apache.org > >>>> <mailto:nizhi...@apache.org>> > >>>> wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> Hello, Igniters. > >>>>> > >>>>> +1 to automatic code style tools. > >>>>> > >>>>> Let's make it already! > >>>>> Do we have a ticket for it? > >>>>> > >>>>> Related discussion - > >> http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble > >> <http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble/>. > >>>>> com/Static-code-analysis-for-Java-td22195.html > >>>>> > >>>>> В Вт, 06/03/2018 в 08:15 +0000, Dmitry Pavlov пишет: > >>>>>> Hi Dmitriy, > >>>>>> > >>>>>> I think we should resurrect thread about addition of code > >> inspections, > >>>>> and > >>>>>> later we can enable automatic control step to TeamCity. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Could you help me to find it? > >>>>>> > >>>>>> вт, 6 мар. 2018 г. в 11:11, Dmitriy Govorukhin < > >>>>> dmitriy.govoruk...@gmail.com <mailto:dmitriy.govoruk...@gmail.com> > >>>>>>> : > >>>>>>> Hi folks, > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Do we have 'inspection' [1] scheme for ignite? > >>>>>>> I see a lot of warnings in my code, and I guess it is because > >> everyone > >>>>> uses > >>>>>>> different schemes. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Let's start the discussion. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> [1] IDEA inspection > >>>>>>> <https://www.jetbrains.com/help/idea/code-inspection.html > >>>>>>> <https://www.jetbrains.com/help/idea/code-inspection.html>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>> > >>> > >>> > >> >
