On 5/19/06, Dennis Lundberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hello I would like to start a discussion about trying to unify which Maven reports should be used for each commons component. The reasons I find for unifying the reports are these: - Makes it easy for our users if we are consistent - they know what to expect - Makes it easier for us to maintain our project.xml files - Facilitate Maven 2 migration Digging into the Maven 1 POMs for commons proper I have come up with the list of reports here below. Some reports that are only used in a few components have been omitted. I have also tried to categorize and describe each report, borrowing/stealing a lot from chapter 6 in the new book "Better Builds with Maven". + means that I think that all components should use this report o means that I think this report should be optional - means that I don't think any component should use this report Standard + license Source health + checkstyle (code formatting)
Agree. But different components use different coding styles, so although we could standardise on the use of the plugin, we can't standardise on the actual rule configuration. + jdepend (quality metrics)
+ pmd/cpd (bugs, code duplication, coding standards) + tasklist (to do list) - findbugs (same as pmd?)
I would rather see this as + than -. FindBugs is an awesome tool, and is absolutely not the same as PMD. In my experience, FindBugs does find real, and, in some cases, serious, bugs within the code that no other tool that I'm aware of can discover. (Don't get me wrong - I love PMD too, but these tools do different things, and both are very valuable.) - simian (same as cpd)
Tests + cobertura (test coverage) + junit (test reports) - clover (same as cobertura) - jcoverage (same as cobertura) Changes since last release + changelog (SCM activity per commit) + clirr (binary compatibility) + developer-activity (SCM activity per developer)
Does anyone really care? + file-activity (SCM activity per file) As with developer-activity, I'm not sure that anyone really cares, although I could see ever-so-slightly more justificatoin for this one. o changes This is only useful if people actually update it. ;-) - jdiff (same as clirr)
Reference + javadoc + jxr (cross reference) User guide o faq
I like the FAQ plugin. I like the way it creates all the links and sections for you. I, for one, am not interested in having to do all that myself, so I disagree with Hen's suggestion that we just use xdocs for the FAQs. -- Martin Cooper - linkcheck (might be enabled during development)
With that I will duck from the flames and see what the rest of you think :) -- Dennis Lundberg --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
