later based on new
> discussions.
>
> Best,
> Stephan
>
>
> On Thu, Jun 27, 2019 at 10:48 PM Hugo Louro wrote:
>
> > +1. Thanks for working on the guide. It's very thorough and a good
> resource
> > to learn good practices from.
> >
> > I wou
+1
> On Jul 23, 2019, at 6:15 AM, Till Rohrmann wrote:
>
> Good idea Jark. +1 for the proposal.
>
> Cheers,
> Till
>
>> On Tue, Jul 23, 2019 at 1:59 PM Hequn Cheng wrote:
>>
>> Hi Jark,
>>
>> Good idea. +1!
>>
>>> On Tue, Jul 23, 2019 at 6:23 PM Jark Wu wrote:
>>>
>>> Thank you all for y
Hi,
I would like to ask if minor, focused, refactoring done by extracting
duplicate code to private methods is welcome for existing code/classes. The
reasoning behind my question is that I want to avoid [1], but at the same
time I clearly identify with [2]. If it is indeed welcome, is it OK to
com
+1. Thanks for working on the guide. It's very thorough and a good resource
to learn good practices from.
I would like use this thread as a placeholder for a couple of topics that
may be deserving of further discussion on different threads:
- What's the best way to keep track of checkstyle versi
