Hi Oliver

fair enough. If it is ensured things work I have no problem with it. Doing
it as part of a profile IMO would be best, by default checkstyle and
perhaps Findbugs may be enabled.
And yes, I will also be at DWX this year, talking about the Money JSR and
and something else I do not yet know (ppt-Karaoke).
Looking forward for a big coffee!

​Best
Anatole
​


2015-05-23 9:17 GMT+02:00 Oliver B. Fischer <[email protected]>:

> Hi Anatole,
>
> with the help of jQAssistant I found a lot of issue in the SPI related
> stuff. Unused files, non existing but listed classes and so on.
>
> I will overhaul the whole configuration so no build will be broken by
> issues found by one of the mentioned tools. Instead they will generate
> reports we can process if we want.
>
> Ok?
>
> BTW, after an initial build I can build any submodule alone.
>
> Will you be at DWX15 in Nürnberg? Then we can discuss this F2F? I looking
> forward to have the coffee you promised ;-)
>
> Bye,
>
> Oliver
>
> Am 22.05.15 um 21:56 schrieb Anatole Tresch:
>
>> Hi Oliver
>>
>> yes, I wanted to discuss that with you, but did not have the time so far
>> ;). Reason behind was that, once more, the build was breaking because of
>> some bug in the tooling (not even a rule but simply some error message). I
>> never had to spend so much useless and unproductive time with tools as in
>> this project, so I simply removed that part (since we have git in place
>> nothing is really deleted, we may readd it at a later stage, or as part of
>> a profile ;) ).
>>
>> What also does not work and is really cumbersome is that the maven build
>> only works when running from the root project (if I remember correctly it
>> is because checkstyle does not find its configuration). Whereas running
>> the
>> build from the root project is definitively useful before doing any final
>> push to the repo, it would be very good, I also can simply run maven for
>> any submodule in the tree on its own, which AFAIK currently fails.
>>
>> In the meantime *I can live with checkstyle as well as findbugs,* since I
>> can handle false positives and the tooling besides that works OK for me.
>> With *jqassistant *I faced more issues recently, so I would prefer to have
>>
>> it optional. I am not against the tools, but as I said if they start to
>> hinder me doing my work on the project effectively, they are not mature
>> enough.
>>
>> OK so far?
>>
>> For my delay on discussing this I offer a coffee and some sweeties on next
>> occasion ;)
>>
>> Cheers
>> Anatole
>>
>>
>> 2015-05-22 19:17 GMT+02:00 Oliver B. Fischer <[email protected]>:
>>
>>  Anatole, you removed simply some parts of my work on the quality of the
>>> code base by not only disabling the tool but removing it at all. To be
>>> honest, I don't like such things because it does not respect the work of
>>> others.
>>>
>>> Oliver
>>>
>>> --
>>> N Oliver B. Fischer
>>> A Schönhauser Allee 64, 10437 Berlin, Deutschland/Germany
>>> P +49 30 44793251
>>> M +49 178 7903538
>>> E [email protected]
>>> S oliver.b.fischer
>>> J [email protected]
>>> X http://xing.to/obf
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
> --
> N Oliver B. Fischer
> A Schönhauser Allee 64, 10437 Berlin, Deutschland/Germany
> P +49 30 44793251
> M +49 178 7903538
> E [email protected]
> S oliver.b.fischer
> J [email protected]
> X http://xing.to/obf
>
>


-- 
*Anatole Tresch*
Java Engineer & Architect, JSR Spec Lead
Glärnischweg 10
CH - 8620 Wetzikon

*Switzerland, Europe Zurich, GMT+1*
*Twitter:  @atsticks*
*Blogs: **http://javaremarkables.blogspot.ch/
<http://javaremarkables.blogspot.ch/>*

*Google: atsticksMobile  +41-76 344 62 79*

Reply via email to