I guess that was about failing build configuration with Checkstype, not compilation build itself.
> On 12 Feb 2019, at 18:03, Павлухин Иван <vololo...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Folks, > > Are you going to fail job compiling Ignite sources [1] if some > inspection found a problem? Can we avoid it? It is quite common > pattern to start some feature implementation with making a sketch and > running tests against it. I found it convenient to skip some style > requirements for such sketches (e.g. well formed javadocs). > > [1] > https://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewType.html?buildTypeId=IgniteTests24Java8_BuildApacheIgnite > > пн, 11 февр. 2019 г. в 11:38, Nikolay Izhikov <nizhi...@apache.org>: >> >> Petr, we should have 1 configuration for project, may be 1 configuration >> per programming language. >> >> пн, 11 февр. 2019 г., 11:33 Petr Ivanov mr.wei...@gmail.com: >> >>> I was asking about how many build configuration is intended? One for all >>> and multiple per module? >>> >>> With IDEA inspections it was going to be build configuration per module. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>> On 11 Feb 2019, at 11:24, Nikolay Izhikov <nizhi...@apache.org> wrote: >>>> >>>> Hello, Petr. >>>> >>>> Are you saying that we have not single build task? And each module builds >>>> when it required? If yes, then I propose to create a task like "Licence >>>> check" which will be run for every patch. >>>> >>>> My point is that violation of codestyle should be treated as hard as >>>> compile error. >>>> >>>> пн, 11 февр. 2019 г., 11:16 Petr Ivanov mr.wei...@gmail.com: >>>> >>>>> Is build configuration Inspections [Core] meant to transform into single >>>>> all-modules check build configuration (without module subdivision)? >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> On 11 Feb 2019, at 11:02, Nikolay Izhikov <nizhi...@apache.org> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Hello, Maxim. >>>>>> >>>>>> +1 from me for migrating to checkstyle. >>>>>> >>>>>> Oleg, there is plugin for IDEA with 2mln downloads - >>>>>> https://plugins.jetbrains.com/plugin/1065-checkstyle-idea >>>>>> >>>>>> I propose do the following: >>>>>> >>>>>> 1. Migrate current checks to checkstyle. >>>>>> 2. Apply checks to all Ignite modules. Currently, only core module are >>>>>> checked. >>>>>> I will review and commit this patch, or do it by my own. >>>>>> >>>>>> 3. Include code style checks to "Build Apache Ignite" suite. Ignite has >>>>> to >>>>>> fail to build if patch violates codestyle. >>>>>> >>>>>> вс, 10 февр. 2019 г. в 07:54, Павлухин Иван <vololo...@gmail.com>: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Hi, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I also think that some warning from IDEA that some code style rule is >>>>>>> violated is a must-have. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> вс, 10 февр. 2019 г. в 01:58, oignatenko <oignate...@gridgain.com>: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Hi Maxim, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I believe that whatever style checks we establish at Teamcity, we >>>>> better >>>>>>>> take care of making it easy for developers to find and fix violations >>>>> in >>>>>>>> their typical dev environment (for Ignite this means, in IDEA). I >>> think >>>>>>> it >>>>>>>> is important that developers can maintain required style with minimal >>>>>>> effort >>>>>>>> on their side. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> If above is doable then I am 200% for migrating our Teamcity >>>>> inspections >>>>>>> to >>>>>>>> checkstyle / maven. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> This is because I am very disappointed observing how it stays broken >>>>> for >>>>>>> so >>>>>>>> long. And worst of all, even when (if) it is fixed, I feel we will >>>>>>> always be >>>>>>>> at risk that it breaks again and that we will have to again wait for >>>>>>> months >>>>>>>> for it to be fixed. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> This is such a stark contrast with my experience regarding checkstyle >>>>>>> based >>>>>>>> inspections. These just work and you just never fear that it is going >>>>> to >>>>>>>> break for some obscure reason, this is so much better than what I >>>>> observe >>>>>>>> now. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> One suggestion in case if we pick checkstyle - I recommend keeping >>> its >>>>>>>> config file somewhere in the project under version control. I used to >>>>>>>> maintain such a shared style config at one of past jobs and after >>> some >>>>>>>> experimenting it turned out most convenient to have it this way - so >>>>> that >>>>>>>> developers could easily assess and discuss style settings and keep >>>>> track >>>>>>> of >>>>>>>> changes in these. (note how Kafka folks from your link [5] appear to >>> be >>>>>>>> doing it this way) >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> regards, Oleg >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Mmuzaf wrote >>>>>>>>> Igniters, >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I've found that some of the community members have faced with >>>>>>>>> `[Inspections] Core suite [1]` is not working well enough on TC. The >>>>>>>>> suite has a `FAILED` status for more than 2 months due to some >>> issues >>>>>>>>> in TeamCity application [2]. Current suite behaviour confuses not >>> only >>>>>>>>> new contributors but also other community members. Moreover, this >>>>>>>>> suite is no longer checks rules we previously configured. For >>>>>>>>> instance, in the master branch, I've found 11 `Unused imports` which >>>>>>>>> should have been caught earlier (e.g. for >>>>>>>>> {{IgniteCachePutAllRestartTest} [3]). >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I think we should make the next step to enable an automatic code >>> style >>>>>>>>> checks. As an example, we can consider the Apache Kafka code style >>> [5] >>>>>>>>> way and configure for the Ignite project a maven-checkstyle-plugin >>>>>>>>> with its own maven profile and run it simultaneously with other TC. >>> We >>>>>>>>> can also enable the previously configured inspection rules, so no >>>>>>>>> coding style violations will be missed. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I see some advantages of using a maven plugin: >>>>>>>>> - an IDE agnostic way for code checks >>>>>>>>> - can be used with different CI and build tools (Jenkins, TC) >>>>>>>>> - executable from the command line >>>>>>>>> - the entry single point to configure new rules >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I've created the ticket [4] and will prepare PR for it. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> WDYT? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> [1] >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>> >>> https://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewType.html?buildTypeId=IgniteTests24Java8_InspectionsCore&branch_IgniteTests24Java8=%3Cdefault%3E&tab=buildTypeStatusDiv >>>>>>>>> [2] https://youtrack.jetbrains.com/issue/TW-58504 >>>>>>>>> [3] >>>>>>> >>>>> >>> https://github.com/apache/ignite/blob/master/modules/core/src/test/java/org/apache/ignite/internal/processors/cache/IgniteCachePutAllRestartTest.java#L29 >>>>>>>>> [4] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-11277 >>>>>>>>> [5] https://github.com/apache/kafka/tree/trunk/checkstyle >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Fri, 21 Dec 2018 at 16:03, Petr Ivanov < >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> mr.weider@ >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> > wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> It seems there is bug in latest 2018.2 TeamCity >>>>>>>>>> Bug is filed [1] >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> [1] https://youtrack.jetbrains.com/issue/TW-58504 >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> On 19 Dec 2018, at 11:31, Petr Ivanov < >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> mr.weider@ >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> > wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Investigating problem, stand by. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On 18 Dec 2018, at 19:41, Dmitriy Pavlov < >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> dpavlov@ >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> > wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Both patches were applied. Maxim, thank you! >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> What about 1. An `Unexpected error during build messages >>>>>>> processing in >>>>>>>>>>>> TeamCity`, what can we do as the next step to fix it? >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Sincerely, >>>>>>>>>>>> Dmitriy Pavlov >>>>>>>>>>>> [cut] >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>> Sent from: http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/ >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> Best regards, >>>>>>> Ivan Pavlukhin >>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>> >>> > > > > -- > Best regards, > Ivan Pavlukhin
