Hello! Ivan, unfortunately, I can't see any formal decision being taken. All I see in the referenced thread is people who are unhappy with obligatory code style checking as a prerequisite to running tests.
Did we hold a formal vote on this issue? Did we even hold an informal vote? It may turn up that it was a voluntary decision by a sole fellow committer which deserves not pinning but discussion. Regards, -- Ilya Kasnacheev вт, 7 июл. 2020 г. в 11:50, Ivan Pavlukhin <vololo...@gmail.com>: > Folks, > > This discussion reoccurs from month to month. Last one I remember is > [1]. It sounds useful to pin a decision to our coding guidelines. What > do you think? > > [1] > http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/DISCUSSION-Separate-code-sanity-check-and-build-task-td47003.html > > 2020-07-07 11:28 GMT+03:00, Вячеслав Коптилин <slava.kopti...@gmail.com>: > > Nikolay, > > > > There is *NO *intention to ignore code style violations and do merge PRs > > into the master branch without fixing them. > > > > Let's assume that I want to implement a dirty fix of a bug, check a > > reproducer from the user list, etc. > > And I do not have the intention to merge that into the master branch as > is, > > however, I do not want to waste my time fixing all code style violations. > > Does this use-case look reasonable? > > > > Thanks, > > Slava. > > > > вт, 7 июл. 2020 г. в 11:07, Nikolay Izhikov <nizhi...@apache.org>: > > > >> Slava. > >> > >> All contributors should follow our code style during their contribution. > >> For now, we have an automatic PR check that is integrated to the GitHub > >> interface. > >> > >> I don’t see any issue here. > >> All open-source project that I know, uses the same approach. > >> > >> Anyway, If some of the experienced community members is interested in > the > >> particular contribution he or she can help a newcomer with the code > style > >> - > >> GitHub interface has the edit button even for someone else’s PR’s > >> > >> > >> > 7 июля 2020 г., в 11:01, Вячеслав Коптилин <slava.kopti...@gmail.com> > >> написал(а): > >> > > >> > Hello Nikolay, > >> > > >> >> Because any code style violations should be fixed before the merge. > >> >> Therefore after the fix, you must rerun TC. > >> >> This means that running heavy suites when code style is violated is a > >> > waste of the resources. > >> > This makes sense, however, to be honest, I don't see that our team > city > >> > servers are really busy. > >> > > >> >> Why do you want to violate code style rules in your PR? > >> > Please take a look at the original e-mail from Ilya: > >> >> This means that I have completely lost an option to run tests against > >> > pull > >> >> requests by new contributors - they usually compile but will not pass > >> >> Checkstyle. That's a blocker. > >> > > >> > This issue has also been discussed here: > >> > > >> > http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/DISCUSSION-Separate-code-sanity-check-and-build-task-td47003.html > >> > > >> > Thanks, > >> > Slava. > >> > > >> > > >> > вт, 7 июл. 2020 г. в 10:47, Nikolay Izhikov <nizhi...@apache.org>: > >> > > >> >> All checks just force rules we agreed on. > >> >> > >> >>> Why this check is so important? Why do you think it is more > important > >> >> than all other tasks/tests? > >> >> > >> >> Because any code style violations should be fixed before the merge. > >> >> Therefore after the fix, you must rerun TC. > >> >> This means that running heavy suites when code style is violated is a > >> >> waste of the resources. > >> >> > >> >> Why do you want to violate code style rules in your PR? > >> >> > >> >> I think instead of hiding style errors we should make our code style > >> >> comfortable for everyone. > >> >> Can you, please, write - what part of the code style hurts you? > >> >> > >> >> > >> >>> 7 июля 2020 г., в 10:39, Вячеслав Коптилин < > slava.kopti...@gmail.com> > >> >> написал(а): > >> >>> > >> >>> Hello Maxim, > >> >>> > >> >>>> Why do you think that splitting the checkstyle build is better > >> >>>> option > >> >>> than fixing code style issues reporting by the checkstyle plugin? > >> >>> Why do you think that Ilya talks that code style errors should not > be > >> >> fixed? > >> >>> > >> >>> It looks weird to me that we do not even start the tests if check > >> >>> style > >> >>> plugin reports violations. > >> >>> Why can't this check be done in parallel with the tests and reported > >> >>> by > >> >>> mtcga bot? > >> >>> Why this check is so important? Why do you think it is more > important > >> >> than > >> >>> all other tasks/tests? > >> >>> > >> >>> Thanks, > >> >>> Slava. > >> >>> > >> >>> пн, 6 июл. 2020 г. в 20:34, Maxim Muzafarov <mmu...@apache.org>: > >> >>> > >> >>>> Hello Ilya, > >> >>>> > >> >>>> Why do you think that splitting the checkstyle build is better > >> >>>> option > >> >>>> than fixing code style issues reporting by the checkstyle plugin? > >> >>>> > >> >>>> On Mon, 6 Jul 2020 at 19:43, Ilya Kasnacheev < > >> ilya.kasnach...@gmail.com > >> >>> > >> >>>> wrote: > >> >>>>> > >> >>>>> Hello! > >> >>>>> > >> >>>>> I have just noticed today that Checkstyle will fail Apache Ignite > >> >> build: > >> >>>>> > >> >>>> > >> >> > >> > https://ci.ignite.apache.org/buildConfiguration/IgniteTests24Java8_BuildApacheIgnite/5443282?buildTab=log&focusLine=3&linesState=683.4289 > >> >>>>> > >> >>>>> This means that I have completely lost an option to run tests > >> >>>>> against > >> >>>> pull > >> >>>>> requests by new contributors - they usually compile but will not > >> >>>>> pass > >> >>>>> Checkstyle. That's a blocker. > >> >>>>> > >> >>>>> Can we please split Checkstyle as a separate build which is > >> >>>>> triggered > >> >>>> with > >> >>>>> Run All? > >> >>>>> I think we even have > >> >>>>> > >> >>>> > >> >> > >> > https://ci.ignite.apache.org/buildConfiguration/IgniteTests24Java8_CheckCodeStyle?mode=builds#all-projects > >> >>>>> > >> >>>>> WDYT? > >> >>>>> > >> >>>>> Regards, > >> >>>>> -- > >> >>>>> Ilya Kasnacheev > >> >>>> > >> >> > >> >> > >> > >> > > > > > -- > > Best regards, > Ivan Pavlukhin >
