+1 I just added my approval to the PR (and again here)
On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 3:25 PM, Jared Stewart <jstew...@pivotal.io> wrote: > I have opened a pull request here <https://github.com/apache/ > incubator-geode/pull/268> to enable the Spotless plugin and to switch to > the Google Java Style formatter templates. > > > > On Oct 18, 2016, at 4:32 PM, Kirk Lund <kl...@pivotal.io> wrote: > > > > For reference TRAC #38741 was a bug with the summary "EOFException during > > deserialize on client update with copy-on-read=true" > > > > -Kirk > > > > > > On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 4:27 PM, Jared Stewart <jstew...@pivotal.io> > wrote: > > > >> To give everyone an update, using the Google Java Style eclipse template > >> there is an issue spotlessCheck where fails for > >> geode-core/src/test/java/org/apache/geode/cache30/ > Bug38741DUnitTest.java > >> even if you run it directly after spotlessApply. This needs to be > >> investigated and fixed before I can open a pull request to enable > spotless. > >> > >> > >>> On Oct 14, 2016, at 4:57 PM, Dan Smith <dsm...@pivotal.io> wrote: > >>> > >>> +1 - The formatting looks better now. > >>> > >>> -Dan > >>> > >>> On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 11:06 AM, Jared Stewart <jstew...@pivotal.io> > >> wrote: > >>> > >>>> I agree that the formatter needs fixing up. Our wiki < > >>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/GEODE/Code+Style+Guide> > >> says > >>>> that we follow the Google Java Style guide, but that is not actually > >> what’s > >>>> in our formatter templates. I pushed a new branch < > https://github.com/ > >>>> jaredjstewart/incubator-geode/tree/spotlessPluginGoogleStyle> that > >> points > >>>> spotless at the actual Google Java Style template, and I think it > makes > >>>> both of the examples you found look better. > >>>> > >>>>> On Oct 13, 2016, at 10:11 AM, Dan Smith <dsm...@pivotal.io> wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>> +1 for adding this to ./gradlew build > >>>>> > >>>>> But I think we might want to fix up the formatter a bit before > >>>> reformatting > >>>>> the code. I tried running spotlessApply, and it did some unfortunate > >>>>> reformatting of code to make it less readable. > >>>>> > >>>>> One problem is with method chaining. We have a few different factory > >> APIs > >>>>> that encourage method chaining, and it put all the method calls on a > >>>> single > >>>>> line. For example here's one change: > >>>>> > >>>>> - ClientCacheFactory ccf = new ClientCacheFactory() > >>>>> - > >>>>> .addPoolServer(NetworkUtils.getServerHostName(server1.getHost()), > >> port) > >>>>> - .set(SECURITY_CLIENT_AUTH_INIT, > >>>>> UserPasswordAuthInit.class.getName() + ".create") > >>>>> - .set(SECURITY_PREFIX+"username", "root") > >>>>> - .set(SECURITY_PREFIX+"password", "root"); > >>>>> + ClientCacheFactory ccf = new > >>>>> ClientCacheFactory().addPoolServer(NetworkUtils. > >>>> getServerHostName(server1.getHost()), > >>>>> port).set(SECURITY_CLIENT_AUTH_INIT, UserPasswordAuthInit.class. > >> getName() > >>>> + > >>>>> ".create").set(SECURITY_PREFIX + "username", > >> "root").set(SECURITY_PREFIX > >>>> + > >>>>> "password", "root"); > >>>>> > >>>>> I see a similar problem where it put array initialization all on a > >> single > >>>>> line: > >>>>> > >>>>> + public void testMultiColOrderByWithIndexResultWithProjection() > >> throws > >>>>> Exception { > >>>>> String queries[] = { > >>>>> // Test case No. IUMR021 > >>>>> - "SELECT ID, description, createTime, pkid FROM /portfolio1 > >> pf1 > >>>>> where ID > 10 order by ID desc, pkid desc ", > >>>>> - "SELECT ID, description, createTime, pkid FROM /portfolio1 > >> pf1 > >>>>> where ID > 10 order by ID asc, pkid asc ", > >>>>> - "SELECT ID, description, createTime, pkid FROM /portfolio1 > >> pf1 > >>>>> where ID > 10 and ID < 20 order by ID asc, pkid asc ", > >>>>> - "SELECT ID, description, createTime, pkid FROM /portfolio1 > >> pf1 > >>>>> where ID > 10 and ID < 20 order by ID desc , pkid desc", > >>>>> - "SELECT ID, description, createTime, pkid FROM /portfolio1 > >> pf1 > >>>>> where ID >= 10 and ID <= 20 order by ID desc, pkid asc ", > >>>>> - "SELECT ID, description, createTime, pkid FROM /portfolio1 > >> pf1 > >>>>> where ID >= 10 and ID <= 20 order by ID asc, pkid desc", > >>>>> - "SELECT ID, description, createTime, pkid FROM /portfolio1 > >> pf1 > >>>>> where ID != 10 order by ID asc , pkid desc", > >>>>> - "SELECT ID, description, createTime, pkid FROM /portfolio1 > >> pf1 > >>>>> where ID != 10 order by ID desc, pkid asc ", > >>>>> - "SELECT ID, description, createTime, pkid FROM /portfolio1 > >> pf1 > >>>>> where ID > 10 order by ID desc, pkid desc limit 5", > >>>>> - "SELECT ID, description, createTime, pkid FROM /portfolio1 > >> pf1 > >>>>> where ID > 10 order by ID asc, pkid asc limit 5", > >>>>> - "SELECT ID, description, createTime, pkid FROM /portfolio1 > >> pf1 > >>>>> where ID > 10 and ID < 20 order by ID asc, pkid desc limit 5 ", > >>>>> - "SELECT ID, description, createTime, pkid FROM /portfolio1 > >> pf1 > >>>>> where ID > 10 and ID < 20 order by ID desc, pkid asc limit 5", > >>>>> - "SELECT ID, description, createTime, pkid FROM /portfolio1 > >> pf1 > >>>>> where ID >= 10 and ID <= 20 order by ID desc, pkid desc limit 5", > >>>>> - "SELECT ID, description, createTime, pkid FROM /portfolio1 > >> pf1 > >>>>> where ID >= 10 and ID <= 20 order by ID asc, pkid asc limit 5", > >>>>> - "SELECT ID, description, createTime, pkid FROM /portfolio1 > >> pf1 > >>>>> where ID != 10 order by ID asc , pkid desc limit 10", > >>>>> - "SELECT ID, description, createTime, pkid FROM /portfolio1 > >> pf1 > >>>>> where ID != 10 order by ID desc, pkid desc limit 10", > >>>>> - > >>>>> - }; > >>>>> + "SELECT ID, description, createTime, pkid FROM /portfolio1 > >> pf1 > >>>>> where ID > 10 order by ID desc, pkid desc ", "SELECT ID, > description, > >>>>> createTime, pkid FROM /portfolio1 pf1 where ID > 10 order by ID asc, > >> pkid > >>>>> asc ", "SELECT ID, description, createTime, pkid FROM /portfolio1 > pf1 > >>>>> where ID > 10 and ID < 20 order by ID asc, pkid asc ", "SELECT ID, > >>>>> description, createTime, pkid FROM /portfolio1 pf1 where ID > 10 and > >> ID < > >>>>> 20 order by ID desc , pkid desc", "SELECT ID, description, > >> createTime, > >>>>> pkid FROM /portfolio1 pf1 where ID >= 10 and ID <= 20 order by ID > desc, > >>>>> pkid asc ", "SELECT ID, description, createTime, pkid FROM > >> /portfolio1 > >>>>> pf1 where ID >= 10 and ID <= 20 order by ID asc, pkid desc", "SELECT > >>>> ID, > >>>>> description, createTime, pkid FROM /portfolio1 pf1 where ID != 10 > order > >>>> by > >>>>> ID asc , pkid desc", "SELECT ID, description, createTime, pkid FROM > >>>>> /portfolio1 pf1 where ID != 10 order by ID desc, pkid asc ", > >>>>> + "SELECT ID, description, createTime, pkid FROM /portfolio1 > >> pf1 > >>>>> where ID > 10 order by ID desc, pkid desc limit 5", "SELECT ID, > >>>>> description, createTime, pkid FROM /portfolio1 pf1 where ID > 10 > order > >> by > >>>>> ID asc, pkid asc limit 5", "SELECT ID, description, createTime, > pkid > >>>> FROM > >>>>> /portfolio1 pf1 where ID > 10 and ID < 20 order by ID asc, pkid desc > >>>> limit > >>>>> 5 ", "SELECT ID, description, createTime, pkid FROM /portfolio1 pf1 > >>>> where > >>>>> ID > 10 and ID < 20 order by ID desc, pkid asc limit 5", "SELECT > ID, > >>>>> description, createTime, pkid FROM /portfolio1 pf1 where ID >= 10 and > >> ID > >>>> <= > >>>>> 20 order by ID desc, pkid desc limit 5", "SELECT ID, description, > >>>>> createTime, pkid FROM /portfolio1 pf1 where ID >= 10 and ID <= 20 > order > >>>> by > >>>>> ID asc, pkid asc limit 5", "SELECT ID, description, createTime, > pkid > >>>> FROM > >>>>> /portfolio1 pf1 where ID != 10 order by ID asc , pkid desc limit 10", > >>>>> "SELECT ID, description, createTime, pkid FROM /portfolio1 pf1 > where > >> ID > >>>>> != 10 order by ID desc, pkid desc limit 10", > >>>>> + > >>>>> + }; > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 9:51 AM, Jared Stewart <jstew...@pivotal.io> > >>>> wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>>> The task is fully suppressible with -x spotlessCheck. Also, if you > >> have > >>>>>> any formatter errors you can automatically fix them with 'gradle > >>>>>> spotlessApply’. > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> On Oct 13, 2016, at 9:40 AM, Kevin Duling <kdul...@pivotal.io> > >> wrote: > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> If we made formatting a warning, then people would probably quickly > >>>>>> ignore > >>>>>>> it. > >>>>>>> If we made formatting an error, we need to be sure we don't get in > to > >>>> the > >>>>>>> situation where <editor of choice>'s formatter is not in agreement > >> with > >>>>>> the > >>>>>>> build's checker. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> I can live with an additional 17 seconds as well. And Jared's > >> already > >>>>>>> reduced the build time locally by 50%. But I still want the > ability > >> to > >>>>>>> suppress the check similar to -x javadoc. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 9:58 PM, William Markito < > >> wmark...@pivotal.io> > >>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> This sounds really good to me as well. +1 > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 4:13 PM, Jared Stewart < > jstew...@pivotal.io > >>> > >>>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> This is running locally on my laptop. Since Spotless is only > doing > >>>>>> code > >>>>>>>>> formatting and not any other static analysis, it already has 0 > >>>> errors. > >>>>>>>>> (Other than, of course, formatting not consistent with the > >> template.) > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> On Oct 12, 2016, at 4:11 PM, Kenneth Howe <kh...@pivotal.io> > >> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> Agree with Mark, this has to work with 0 errors before it would > be > >>>>>>>>> useful in precheckin. I think I could live with an additional 17 > >>>>>> seconds > >>>>>>>>> most of the time for running the spotlessCheck as suggested. > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> Jared, Is that 17 seconds running locally on your laptop or on a > >>>> more > >>>>>>>>> capable machine? > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> Ken > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> On Oct 12, 2016, at 3:39 PM, Jared Stewart < > jstew...@pivotal.io> > >>>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> If you want to try it out, I pushed a branch to my Geode repo > >> that > >>>>>>>>> contains this change: > >>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/jaredjstewart/incubator-geode/ > >>>> tree/spotlessPlugin > >>>>>>>> < > >>>>>>>>> https://github.com/jaredjstewart/incubator-geode/ > >> tree/spotlessPlugin > >>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> On Oct 12, 2016, at 2:27 PM, Darrel Schneider < > >>>>>> dschnei...@pivotal.io > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> I like Dan's idea of catching formatting issues earlier but I > >>>> think > >>>>>>>>> adding > >>>>>>>>>>>> 5-10 minutes to "build" would be too much. Currently when I'm > >>>> trying > >>>>>>>>> to do > >>>>>>>>>>>> a quick build I use -xjavadoc. I'd probably do the same for > this > >>>>>>>>> target if > >>>>>>>>>>>> it was part of build until I'm ready to do a precheckin. > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> Mark, wouldn't running the formatter on all our java files and > >>>>>>>> checking > >>>>>>>>>>>> them in get these issues down to 0? > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 12:53 PM, Udo Kohlmeyer < > >>>>>>>> ukohlme...@pivotal.io > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> +1 - adding checkstyle to precheckin. > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> If the developer uses the provided templates ( eclipse + > >>>> intellij) > >>>>>>>>> then > >>>>>>>>>>>>> most of the formatting issues should be handled before > >>>> precheckin. > >>>>>>>>> Also, if > >>>>>>>>>>>>> a developer has a questionable coding style, that should > lessen > >>>> as > >>>>>>>>> that > >>>>>>>>>>>>> developer will have resolve the issues before being able to > >>>> commit. > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> I also believe that this should not be an overbearing and > >>>> intrusive > >>>>>>>>>>>>> process. > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> --Udo > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> On 13/10/16 6:36 am, Mark Bretl wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Dan, > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> There is some extra amount of time, 5-10 minutes extra for > the > >>>>>>>> entire > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> project (depending on your CPU). I think the real issue to > >>>> adding > >>>>>>>> it > >>>>>>>>> to > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> the > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> precheckin target and have it be 'effective' is it needs to > >> run > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> successfully, otherwise it would turn into noise most of the > >>>> time > >>>>>> I > >>>>>>>>> think. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> We need to get the issues down to 0 or manage to set a new > >>>>>> baseline > >>>>>>>>> (not > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> the best idea), which is a lot of work, to make it run > >>>>>>>> successfully. > >>>>>>>>> Right > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> now, if you run the target, it will fail every time since > >> there > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> outstanding > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> issues in the code and very hard to tell what issues were > >>>>>>>> introduced. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> --Mark > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 11:34 AM, Dan Smith < > >> dsm...@pivotal.io> > >>>>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Seems like it should run as part of the build target. The > only > >>>>>>>>> reason to > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> make it part of precheckin is if it takes a long time, > >>>> otherwise > >>>>>>>>> people > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> should get fast feedback they need to change their code > >> before > >>>>>>>> they > >>>>>>>>> push. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -Dan > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 11:24 AM, Jared Stewart < > >>>>>>>>> jstew...@pivotal.io> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +1 to running during the precheckin target as well as > Travis > >> CI > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Oct 12, 2016 11:20 AM, "Darrel Schneider" < > >>>>>>>>> dschnei...@pivotal.io> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If Travis CI is only run on pull requests then that is not > >>>>>> enough > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> because > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> committers do not submit pull requests. Having it run > during > >>>> the > >>>>>>>>> gradle > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> build or precheckin target is also needed. In addition to > >>>> that > >>>>>> I > >>>>>>>>> also > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wanted PRs to be checked. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 11:12 AM, Jared Stewart < > >>>>>>>>> jstew...@pivotal.io> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It would certainly be necessary to make sure that the > code > >>>>>> style > >>>>>>>>> to > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> be > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> enforced is sensible, e.g. doe not use wildcard imports. > We > >>>>>>>> would > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> also > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> want to make one large commit to format all existing code > >>>> before > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> turning > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this on. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mark - Thank you for the information about the existing > >>>> setup. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mark, Darrel, Kevin - Given all of your comments, I > think > >> it > >>>>>>>>> might > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> make > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> more sense to add the flag to enable it in Travis CI > rather > >>>> than > >>>>>>>> as > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> part > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of the build. This way your build pass regardless of > >>>>>>>> whitespace, > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> but > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CI job would fail on PRs if they did not adhere to the > >>>>>> standard > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> formatting. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Anthony - It doesn’t seem to me that turning this on > would > >>>>>> have > >>>>>>>>> the > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> effect > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of combining reformatting commits and logic changes. > >>>> Rather, > >>>>>>>>> since > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> all > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> code would already be formatted, there would no longer be > >> any > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> reformatting > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> commits except for single large commits when the code > >> style > >>>>>>>> file > >>>>>>>>> was > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> updated. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Oct 12, 2016, at 11:01 AM, Bruce Schuchardt < > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> bschucha...@pivotal.io > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I like the idea of doing this but I don't think > >> Checkstyle > >>>>>>>>> should > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> be > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> enabled until all of the code is reformatted. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Also, last time I checked there was still a problem > with > >>>> the > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IntelliJ > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> auto-format settings. It still used wildcard imports, > >> which I > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> believe > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> we > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> don't allow. I've manually changed my settings in > >>>> Editor->Code > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Style->Java > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to "Use single class import" to correct that problem. I > >>>>>>>>> couldn't see > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> how > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to get Gradle to do it. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Le 10/12/2016 à 10:28 AM, Anthony Baker a écrit : > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Source code with a consistent look-and-feel makes it > >>>> easier > >>>>>>>> for > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> people > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to join the project community and contribute. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Let’s continue to keep reformatting commits separate > from > >>>>>>>> logic > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> changes—otherwise it’s too hard to review. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Anthony > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Oct 12, 2016, at 10:06 AM, Dan Smith < > >>>> dsm...@pivotal.io> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +1 > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> This might be a good time to reformat the code since > I > >>>>>> don't > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> think > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> there > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> are too many long lived feature branches outstanding. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -Dan > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 10:00 AM, Jared Stewart < > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> jstew...@pivotal.io > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I would like to advocate for adding a Checkstyle < > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://checkstyle > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> . > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> sourceforge.net/> or Spotless < > >> https://github.com/diffplug/ > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> spotless > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gradle task to our build process to ensure that all code > >>>>>> checked > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> meets > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the formatting standards described on the wiki < > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/ > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> confluence/display/GEODE/Code+Style+Guide> (and in the > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> intellij/eclipse > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> formatter xml files in our repository). This will > >> alleviate > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> difficulties > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> reviewing code when whitespace or formatting has > changed > >>>>>> since > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> all > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> code > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> checked in will already comply with standards. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> -- > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> ~/William > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >> > >> > >
