Try this commit hash instead: d0175ec5aa8acf1b34ece3183fe03e9874450cbb (from feature/spotlessPlugin).
> On Oct 21, 2016, at 4:16 PM, Kirk Lund <kl...@pivotal.io> wrote: > > FYI, feeb5c98402881156b34e222c58ce15c71a4fca7 doesn't exist in the Apache > git repo. > > Is there a way to reformat a branch and then rebase on develop to minimize > conflicts? > > -Kirk > > > On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 1:36 PM, Jared Stewart <jstew...@pivotal.io> wrote: > >> Fantastic, thanks for merging this in Mark. For anyone with outstanding >> work on branches made before this change, your life may be made easier by >> cherry-picking feeb5c98402881156b34e222c58ce15c71a4fca7 (which added >> Spotless) into your branch and then running ‘gradlew spotlessApply’ on it >> before attempting to merge into develop. >> >> — Jared >>> On Oct 21, 2016, at 1:33 PM, Mark Bretl <asf.mbr...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> Thanks Jared for the suggestion of Spotless and follow-up work. >>> >>> This is now completed and checked into develop. As this does touch many >>> files, be prepared the next time you pull. >>> >>> --Mark >>> >>> >>> >>> On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 1:21 PM, Jared Stewart <jstew...@pivotal.io> >> wrote: >>> >>>> Done! :) >>>> >>>> - Jared >>>>> On Oct 21, 2016, at 12:27 PM, Mark Bretl <asf.mbr...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> One more time! :) >>>>> >>>>> Conflicting files >>>>> geode-core/src/test/java/org/apache/geode/disttx/ >> PRDistTXDUnitTest.java >>>>> geode-core/src/test/java/org/apache/geode/disttx/ >>>> PRDistTXWithVersionsDUnitTest.java >>>>> geode-core/src/test/java/org/apache/geode/internal/cache/execute/ >>>> PRTransactionDUnitTest.java >>>>> >>>>> --Mark >>>>> >>>>> On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 12:08 PM, Jared Stewart <jstew...@pivotal.io> >>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> I just pulled and rebased onto develop, and force pushed into the >>>> existing >>>>>> pull request. It should be clean to merge in now. >>>>>> >>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>> Jared >>>>>>> On Oct 21, 2016, at 11:57 AM, Mark Bretl <asf.mbr...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I believe there is enough consensus here to check this into develop. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Jared, due to recent checkins into develop, can you update the pull >>>>>> request >>>>>>> one more time? Trying to make this as clean as possible. I will check >>>>>> into >>>>>>> develop after the update, unless someone else gets to it first. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> All, can we hold checkins on develop until the new formatter is >>>> applied? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> --Mark >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 9:03 AM, Kenneth Howe <kh...@pivotal.io> >>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> +1 >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Oct 21, 2016, at 8:27 AM, Bruce Schuchardt < >>>> bschucha...@pivotal.io> >>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> +1 >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Le 10/20/2016 à 5:13 PM, Udo Kohlmeyer a écrit : >>>>>>>>>> +1 >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On 20/10/16 4:56 pm, Mark Bretl wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> +1 as well... >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> - Pulled changes >>>>>>>>>>> - Executed './gradlew clean build' and was successful. >>>>>>>>>>> - Modified a couple of random files to test >>>>>>>>>>> - Ran './gradlew clean build' again and failed expectedly >>>>>>>>>>> - Ran './gradlew spotlessApply', task was successful >>>>>>>>>>> - Ran './gradlew clean build' and succeeded >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Great addition! As long as others are good with the formatter, >>>> then I >>>>>>>> am >>>>>>>>>>> good. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> --Mark >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 3:40 PM, Kirk Lund <kl...@apache.org> >>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> +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 testMultiColOrderByWithIndexRe >>>>>>>> sultWithProjection() >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 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 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>> >>>> >> >>
