Hi Shawn,

I'm also interested in how IDE warning logic could be used more.

https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-7746 is in that direction, 
indirectly i.e. it would guard against re-introduction of warnings/errors 
previously dealt with.

Thanks,
Christine

----- Original Message -----
From: dev@lucene.apache.org
To: dev@lucene.apache.org
At: 03/12/17 20:53:58

On 3/11/2017 4:48 PM, Daniel Jeliński wrote:
> I started fixing code issues reported by Findbugs; right now it is
> reporting 4000+ issues in lucene/solr repository. I could use some
> guidance:
> 1) Will one JIRA issue be sufficient to cover all Findbugs-related
> items, or should I raise separate items for distinct problems reported
> by Findbugs? I raised LUCENE-7739 as a catch-all issue, but I can
> split it if that's preferred.
> 2) My plan is to fix trivial issues first, then work on the harder
> ones. I already sent a patch to fix issues related to unnecessary
> boxing/unboxing when parsing strings. That patch covers the entire
> codebase, but in my opinion it's fairly straightforward. Is that
> acceptable, or should I split the patch somehow? Like, lucene/solr, or
> one file at a time, or one issue at a time or...

I wonder how much overlap there is between FindBugs and IDE warnings
from Eclipse and Idea.

I have wanted to tackle the thousands of warnings that Eclipse shows me
for quite some time, but I don't really know how to tell when the
warning should be taken seriously and when it should be suppressed. 
When I have mentioned it before, nobody else really has any interest,
doesn't consider it to be a problem.

Thanks,
Shawn


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org

Reply via email to