Igniters, The new `Inspections: Core` suite [2] configured on TeamCity (pass successfully with - Inspections total: 0, errors: 0 ). The next rules are enabled for this suite: - `Missorted modifiers`; - `'size() == 0' replaceable with 'isEmpty()'`; - `Add missing @Override annotation`; - `Fix unused imports`;
Let's incule it to the `Run::All` group on TC, so we will check these rules automatically for each PR. Any objections? Talking about the details, - the issue [1] with adding an inspections configuration for TC have PA status; - the new configuration ignite_inspections_teamcity.xml added to PR; - four rules which are already fixed in the master branch enabled in config; - the `Inspections:Core` suite configured to use the inspections configuration from the local branch; - the example `how to use inspections from the command line` added. Petr, Nikolay, Thank you for your support! [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-9983 [2] https://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewType.html?buildTypeId=IgniteTests24Java8_InspectionsCore&branch_IgniteTests24Java8=pull%2F5059%2Fhead&tab=buildTypeStatusDiv [3] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-9983?focusedCommentId=16662323&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels%3Acomment-tabpanel#comment-16662323 On Tue, 23 Oct 2018 at 19:16 Nikolay Izhikov <nizhi...@apache.org> wrote: > Hello, Maxim. > > +1 from me. > > I vote to enable static inspections for the Ignite codebase. > Thank you for that contributions! > > В Вт, 23/10/2018 в 19:09 +0300, Maxim Muzafarov пишет: > > Igniters, > > > > I've fixed some issues according to the inspections.xml configuration: > > - `Missorted modifiers`; > > - `'size() == 0' replaceable with 'isEmpty()'`; > > - `Add missing @Override annotation`; > > These one have `In progress` state: > > - `Fix unused imports`; > > - `Remove unnecessary @SuppressWarnings annotation`; > > > > The list of issues related to the current Code Inspections changes can be > > found [1] > > with using label `inspections`. So, to move forward and not lose current > > changes I > > propose to: > > - Create the new configuration idea\ignite_inspections_teamcity.xml (I > > will file a new issue for it); > > - Tune `Inspections: Core` Suite to use this configuration profile (It > > will run with each PR); > > - In the case with fixing a new inspection rule enable it this > inspection > > configuration. > > > > This will allow us to move forward in small steps and at some point of > time > > in future we will switch > > this ignite_inspections_teamcity.xml with the > > default ignite_inspections.xml. > > > > Thoughts? > > Pert Ivanov, will you help to tune `Inspections: Core` suite? > > > > [1] > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-9923?jql=project%20%3D%20Ignite%20AND%20labels%20%3D%20inspections > > > > On Sat, 25 Aug 2018 at 00:54 Dmitriy Pavlov <dpavlov....@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > > IntelliJ Idea shows missing @Override annotation on my installation. > Not > > > sure it comes from our inspection or not. > > > > > > Anyway, count on me. > > > > > > пт, 24 авг. 2018 г. в 9:25, Maxim Muzafarov <maxmu...@gmail.com>: > > > > > > > Folks, > > > > > > > > I think we can make a small step further with Ignite Inspections. > > > > > > > > I've created these tickets [1], [2] for myself according to > previously > > > > added > > > > `idea/ignite_inspections.xml` and I plan to complete them. > > > > > > > > Who will help me with review and merge? > > > > > > > > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-9311 - Add missing > > > > @Override annotation > > > > [2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-9312 - Remove > > > > > > unnecessary > > > > @SuppressWarnings annotation > > > > > > > > On Thu, 16 Aug 2018 at 19:53 Dmitriy Pavlov <dpavlov....@gmail.com> > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > Hi Pavel, > > > > > > > > > > Thank you for noticing and bringing it here. I've fixed TC failure. > > > > > > > > > > Sincerely, > > > > > Dmitriy Pavlov > > > > > > > > > > чт, 16 авг. 2018 г. в 0:10, Pavel Pereslegin <xxt...@gmail.com>: > > > > > > > > > > > Hello Igniters. > > > > > > > > > > > > It seems that "idea/ignite_inspections.xml" should be excluded > from > > > > > > "check-licenses" maven profile, because "_Licenses Headers_" > > > > > > configuration always fails now [1] on TeamCity. > > > > > > > > > > > > [1] > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewType.html?buildTypeId=IgniteTests24Java8_LicensesHeaders&tab=buildTypeHistoryList&branch_IgniteTests24Java8=%3Cdefault%3E > > > > > > ср, 15 авг. 2018 г. в 20:49, Dmitriy Pavlov < > dpavlov....@gmail.com>: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I've updated wiki page > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/Coding+Guidelines#CodingGuidelines-C.CodeInspection > > > > > > > with > > > > > > > reference to settings.xml placement in the project. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It is only advice, so I hope you don't mind having this > reference. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ср, 15 авг. 2018 г. в 16:45, Dmitriy Pavlov < > dpavlov....@gmail.com > > > > > > > > : > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Maxim, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thank you for stepping in. I've committed the first version > here > > > > > > > > 'idea/ignite_inspections.xml'. We can move it to project > default > > > > > > > > > > later > > > > > > when > > > > > > > > all inspection problems are fixed. > > > > > > > > Commit: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=ignite.git;a=commit;h=3e0f04edf7cc0aa1631fbd1b9af1e9b87b697eb1 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Igniters, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > you can enable this profile using the following steps: > > > > > > Inspections > > > > > > > > (icon)->Configure inspections->(settings button)->Import > > > > > > > > > > > > Profile->select > > > > > > > > file and import. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sincerely, > > > > > > > > Dmitriy Pavlov > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > вт, 14 авг. 2018 г. в 16:31, Maxim Muzafarov < > maxmu...@gmail.com > > > > > > > > : > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dmitry and other Igniters, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Previously you has suggested to commit `Code Inspections` > into > > > > > > > > > > Ignite > > > > > > > > > codebase. > > > > > > > > > It makes sense for me. I think it's the easiest way to > share > > > > > > this > > > > > > profile > > > > > > > > > among community > > > > > > > > > members and this inspection can be set as for the project > level. > > > > > > > > > So, I suggest: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1) According to Jetbrains documentation [1] the inspection > > > > > > profile > > > > > > can be > > > > > > > > > placed to > > > > > > > > > `<project>/.idea/inspectionProfiles` with name > > > > > > > > `Project_Default.xml` > > > > > > > > > (hope most of us using IDEA for development) > > > > > > > > > This allows enable this profile automatically on per > project > > > > > > level > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > will > > > > > > > > > simplify > > > > > > > > > development process according to rules accepted by our > > > > > > community. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2) I can file tickets and do some of them to fix inspection > > > > > > > > failures > > > > > > which > > > > > > > > > Alexey mentioned > > > > > > > > > earlier. Hope other members of community will help me with > it. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 3) I think `Inspections (Core)` TeamCity can be triggered > as > > > > > > > > nightly > > > > > > build > > > > > > > > > as it takes more > > > > > > > > > than 4 hours. Suppose, inspection build in each PR is not > the > > > > > > best > > > > > > way in > > > > > > > > > our case. New run > > > > > > > > > here [2]. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 4) We can tune our MTCGA.Bot to notify members with new > > > > > > inspection > > > > > > > > > failures > > > > > > > > > added by them. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Also, I've taken Alexey's inspection file as an example, > I’ve > > > > > > > > > > checked > > > > > > what > > > > > > > > > we already discussed > > > > > > > > > previously (e.g. `Anonymous class can be converted to > lambda` > > > > > > > > should > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > > disabled by default) > > > > > > > > > and added these additional rules to it: > > > > > > > > > - General | Line is longer than allowed by code style > > > > > > > > > - Java | Code maturity | Call to 'printStackTrace()' > > > > > > > > > - Java | Code style issues | Unnecessary 'null' check > before > > > > > > > > > > > > 'equals()' > > > > > > > > > call > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If we decide to proceed I will attach this file to JIRA. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [1] > https://www.jetbrains.com/help/idea/code-inspection.html > > > > > > > > > [2] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewType.html?buildTypeId=IgniteTests24Java8_InspectionsCore&tab=buildTypeStatusDiv&branch_IgniteTests24Java8=pull%2F3710%2Fhead > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, 14 Aug 2018 at 16:19 Dmitriy Pavlov < > > > > > > > > dpavlov....@gmail.com> > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Dmitriy Govoruknin, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It seems there is a lack of volunteers to apply code > > > > > > inspections > > > > > to > > > > > > our > > > > > > > > > CI > > > > > > > > > > & patch submission process. Probably we could come back > to > > > > > > your > > > > > > > > > > initial idea about setting up inspection locally. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Could you commit or share your IDEA inspection settings? > I > > > > > > could > > > > > > apply > > > > > > > > > it > > > > > > > > > > at least on my machine and remove odd warning types one > by > > > > > > one. > > > > > > What do > > > > > > > > > you > > > > > > > > > > think? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sincerely, > > > > > > > > > > Dmitriy Pavlov > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > сб, 4 авг. 2018 г. в 1:22, Dmitriy Pavlov < > > > > > > > > dpavlov....@gmail.com > > > > > > : > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Ideally, I should not asking for people to solve > something > > > > > > for > > > > > me. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I just want this idea did not disappear from our radar. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > пт, 3 авг. 2018 г. в 23:47, Dmitriy Setrakyan < > > > > > > > > > > > > dsetrak...@apache.org > > > > > > > > > > : > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Aug 3, 2018 at 7:49 AM, Dmitriy Pavlov < > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > dpavlov....@gmail.com> > > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I understand it is not so Apache-way from my side > to ask > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > volunteers to > > > > > > > > > > > > do > > > > > > > > > > > > > some things (instead of contributing it by myself). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dmitriy, I am not sure why you feel this is not the > Apache > > > > > > > > way. > > > > > > No > > > > > > > > > one > > > > > > > > > > can > > > > > > > > > > > > do everything themselves. You should absolutely keep > > > > > > > > > > recruiting > > > > > > more > > > > > > > > > > > > volunteers from the community. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > D. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > > Maxim Muzafarov > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > -- > > > > Maxim Muzafarov > > > > > -- -- Maxim Muzafarov
