Hi James, I see this as an ongoing task... the types of things that Checkstyle raises are the types of things that tend to creep in continually, for various reasons, even moreso with a community-driven project like Struts.
That being said, I think there is value in getting what is there now taken care of sooner rather than later. Waiting will only result in more issues showing up in the reports down the road, and that will tend, I think, to dissuade anyone from resolving them. It would be easier for these things to never be addressed. Let's face it, it's not what I would consider glamorous work :) That too being said, I don't mind volunteering as the "Checkstyle Police", so to speak, ongoing, and try and get it all taken care of. But the sooner they can start being applied, the better. I don't think this is the type of stuff that would impact a 1.3 release either way, but I do think getting as many of these issues resolved before a next release has more value than waiting. That's just my opinion. I don't want to speak for Don here, but his last comment on the ticket would seem to indicate he may agree with this (hope I'm not reading *too* much into it Don :) ). Frank On Wed, August 24, 2005 8:45 am, James Mitchell said: > I saw the tread, but I haven't followed that discussion. I would > rather wait till after 1.3.0 is out there. If you can wait till > things settle down, I'd be happy to apply your fixes then. After > all, the activity may make your patches out of date and we would need > to do it ourselves or ask for help again. > > Ping me again after 1.3.0 is out and remind me to get on this. > Thanks man. > > -- > James Mitchell > Software Engineer / Open Source Evangelist > Consulting / Mentoring / Freelance > EdgeTech, Inc. > http://www.edgetechservices.net/ > 678.910.8017 > AIM: jmitchtx > Yahoo: jmitchtx > MSN: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Skype: jmitchtx > > > > On Aug 24, 2005, at 12:43 AM, Frank W. Zammetti wrote: > >> Anyone have a chance to look or think about this? I'd like to >> continue the work but I'd also like to know if folks are receptive >> to it or not. >> >> Maybe you were all just busier today than I was... I Unfortunately >> have a car that's getting ready to die any day now, so most of my >> time was spent leisurely comparing and running numbers all day :) >> >> Frank >> >> Frank W. Zammetti wrote: >> >>> Hi all, >>> I'm just trying to guage what the consensus is with regard to >>> applying Checkstyle fixes (yes, it's a bit of a strange itch >>> perhaps, but it's *my* itch! :) )... >>> I just submitted a batch (ticket #36306), and would like to >>> resolve as many more as possible, but I'd like to know what >>> everyones' thinking is with regard to when they will/should be >>> applied... would I be putting in a little too much effort if I'm >>> trying to get them into the first 1.3 release? What I mean is, if >>> everyone thinks they should be put off for a later release then >>> there's no need for me to bust my butt as much, I can work a bit >>> more leisurely on things :) >>> If however, folks think it would be better to get them applied >>> sooner than later, which is my belief frankly, any committer >>> willing to do that in the short term? >>> Just as a quick summary... I counted 4,760 Checkstyle complaints >>> on the current TRUNK, and the batch I just submitted resolves >>> 1,462. Virtually none of it alters actual code, in fact only 178 >>> do and that was just to break up lines longer than 80 characters, >>> so I'd say these are relatively benign fixes (and I'll state what >>> should be assumed: everything compiled fine for me and all unit >>> tests passed). There's still probably 2,000 more or so that would >>> fall into that same relatively "safe" category (lots of javadocs >>> fixes for example) before I even think about those that might >>> require some actual thought/discussion :) >>> Thanks all! >>> >> >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> >> > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
