I use: * jshint (not jslint) * the --checkstyle-reporter it features * written to an xml file * read by publisher "Violations" in the Jenkins job as type "checkstyle"
-- Tem On Jan 17, 2013, at 11:20 AM, Ulli Hafner <ullrich.haf...@gmail.com> wrote: > Just to make sure that we are talking about the same plug-ins: > Are you using the jslint and checkstyle plug-in? Or are you using the > violations plug-in? > > My comments make only sense if you use the jslint plugin and then the > checkstyle plugin;-) > > Ulli > > Am 17.01.2013 um 02:49 schrieb TeMc <mail.t...@gmail.com>: > >> >> On Jan 16, 2013, at 6:31 PM, Ulli Hafner <ullrich.haf...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> >>>> Why does the Checkstyle page viewer need the full paths? All it needs to >>>> do is output the given file name (regardless of whether it exists or not) >>>> and the warnings/errors for those files. >>>> >>>> If it wants to use the paths to display samples of the code, how does that >>>> work for old builds? Files could have been moved by then, or Jenkins might >>>> be installed in a different location etc. Unless it caches the samples >>>> during the build this doesn't scale very well. >>>> >>> >>> The checkstyle plug-in creates a copy for each file that contains a >>> warning. If the file does not exist, then you just can't navigate to the >>> source code - the rest of the plug-in should work without any problems… >>> >>> Ulli >> >> I don't care much about navigating the source code. >> >> All I want is to see the warnings that jshint outputted in the Checkstyle >> XML file given to Jenkins via Violations. >> >> Right now all I see isa number and a couple of files with broken links. I >> can't read the actual warnings (which is the whole point, otherwise I can >> just have the output go to the console output and read the xml directly, I'm >> using this plugin to visualise the data). >> >> I don't need it to do any fancy fetching of the files themselves, just read >> the xml file and show each message for each file name. >> >> It shouldn't fall flat on its face just because it doesn't know how to >> resolve the file name. Checkstyle reports don't need to have absolute or >> (currently) existing file paths. All the information is right there in the >> xml file. >> >> -- Tem >> >
