Peter, Why 44 errors are green?
https://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewLog.html?buildId=1145974&tab=buildResultsDiv&buildTypeId=IgniteTests24Java8_InspectionsAop 2018-03-28 16:27 GMT+03:00 Petr Ivanov <mr.wei...@gmail.com>: > After several problems, example run on Aleksey’s configuration is > complete: https://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewLog.html?buildId=1164652 < > https://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewLog.html?buildId=1164652> > > > > On 28 Mar 2018, at 10:28, Petr Ivanov <mr.wei...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > Started https://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewLog.html?buildId=1164002 < > https://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewQueued.html?itemId=1163998> with > Aleksey’s inspections profile. > > Core (long) and AOP (short) modules will be tested as example. > > > > > > > >> On 27 Mar 2018, at 19:38, Dmitry Pavlov <dpavlov....@gmail.com <mailto: > dpavlov....@gmail.com>> wrote: > >> > >> Hi Petr, > >> > >> Could you please take inspections and run it on AI code base in > >> https://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewType.html?buildTypeId= > IgniteTests24Java8_InspectionsCore&branch_IgniteTests24Java8=%3Cdefault% > 3E&tab=buildTypeStatusDiv <https://ci.ignite.apache.org/ > viewType.html?buildTypeId=IgniteTests24Java8_InspectionsCore&branch_ > IgniteTests24Java8=%3Cdefault%3E&tab=buildTypeStatusDiv> > >> ? > >> > >> Sincerely, > >> Dmitriy Pavlov > >> > >> вт, 27 мар. 2018 г. в 19:27, Dmitry Pavlov <dpavlov....@gmail.com>: > >> > >>> Alexey, thank you for bring this topic to top. > >>> > >>> What do you think about committing this inspections into Ignite code > base? > >>> > >>> What can be our next steps after demonstrating CI check is possible > >>> https://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewType.html?buildTypeId= > IgniteTests24Java8_InspectionsCore&branch_IgniteTests24Java8=%3Cdefault% > 3E&tab=buildTypeStatusDiv > >>> ? > >>> > >>> Sincerely, > >>> Dmitriy Pavlov > >>> > >>> вт, 27 мар. 2018 г. в 15:28, Alexey Goncharuk < > alexey.goncha...@gmail.com > >>>> : > >>> > >>>> Bumping up. > >>>> > >>>> Attached is my local inspections profile exported from Idea. Let's run > >>>> the first iteration and check if it differs significantly from other > >>>> community members. > >>>> > >>>> --AG > >>>> > >>>> 2018-03-19 16:39 GMT+03:00 Petr Ivanov <mr.wei...@gmail.com>: > >>>> > >>>>> 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.govorukhin@ > 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.govorukhin@ > 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>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> > > > >
