Inspection suites should be failed manually by some fail condition. This question will become actual in future. How to fail such suite on TC?
ср, 28 мар. 2018 г. в 18:54, Anton Vinogradov <a...@apache.org>: > 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>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>> > > > > > > > >
