Hi, What if the CS* comments are removed in trunk, so the committers are happy, but accepted in the branch, so Glenn can work as he wants to? Not a perfect solution, but maybe an acceptable compromise, as long as somebody removes the comments prior to merging the branch back into trunk?
Regards, Georg Datterl ------ Kontakt ------ Georg Datterl Geneon media solutions gmbh Gutenstetter Straße 8a 90449 Nürnberg HRB Nürnberg: 17193 Geschäftsführer: Yong-Harry Steiert Tel.: 0911/36 78 88 - 26 Fax: 0911/36 78 88 - 20 www.geneon.de Weitere Mitglieder der Willmy MediaGroup: IRS Integrated Realization Services GmbH: www.irs-nbg.de Willmy PrintMedia GmbH: www.willmy.de Willmy Consult & Content GmbH: www.willmycc.de -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- Von: Simon Pepping [mailto:spepp...@leverkruid.eu] Gesendet: Freitag, 13. August 2010 14:41 An: fop-dev@xmlgraphics.apache.org Betreff: Re: [Bug 49733] [PATCH] resolve compilation, checkstyle, javadoc warnings (a proposal for next steps) Glenn, On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 05:07:52PM +0800, Glenn Adams wrote: > In any case, we now appear to be at a juncture where one of the following > options may be implemented: > > (1) leave the CS* comments in place, but DON'T change the checkstyle rules > AT THIS TIME (but reserve option to change later) > (2) remove the CS* comments, but DON'T change the checkstyle rules, leaving > at least 279 warnings/errors to be produced; > (3) remove the CS* comments, but DO change the checkstyle rules AT THIS TIME > such that none of the CS* comments are required > > I prefer option #1. > > I cannot accept option #2, since it leaves a large number of reported > warnings, thus negating my primary goal in creating this patch. > > I can live with option #3, although it requires editing around 100 files to > remove the CS* comments. And it also requires modifying the checkstyle rule > set, and in some cases removing or weakening potentially useful rules. I would prefer something like option #2, and so do a few other committers. I understand this produces an unacceptable working mode for you. I can live with that, and we can review the CHECKSTYLE comments later in an effort to make further improvements. I would like to hear Jeremias' comment on the removal of the deprecated methods. Deprecated methods are a fact of life. Simon -- Simon Pepping home page: http://www.leverkruid.eu
