I propose that for the upcoming lang 2.1 release we leave the errors unfixed and leave the checkstyle report as is.
1. Leave them unfixed because the errors are all documentation-related, and while it is important to fix them, I don't believe the problems are detrimental to the product. It has taken long enough to get the release out (and I take some of the blame for the slowness) and I don't believe it is worth delaying longer to make what I consider marginally useful fixes. Unless someone gets to them before the final RC. 2. Leave the checkstyle report as is because the problems should be fixed, and I'm worried that if we hide them for this release then they'll be forgotten. I'd rather take the time after the release to either fix them or hide them after appropriate discussion, which I believe should also not hold up the release. Thoughts? On 5/24/05, Simon Kitching <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hi, > > I've checked > > http://people.apache.org/~stevencaswell/commons-lang-2.1/docs/checkstyle-report.html > and there is a massive number of checkstyle errors reported. > > I suggest you either fix them or turn off the checkstyle checks you > don't want. Fixing the problem is probably better. > > > By the way, I've struck a checkstyle problem when using it in the > digester site. Despite project.properties having > > maven.checkstyle.properties=${basedir}/checkstyle.xml > > it doesn't look to me like the specified checkstyle.xml file is actually > being used. I can even change the contents to invalid xml and no error > is reported. > > Lang has exactly the same setup for checkstyle reports. Does the > checkstyle.xml file have any effect in lang? > > Regards, > > Simon > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > -- Steven Caswell [EMAIL PROTECTED] Take back the web - http://www.mozilla.org
