First round of Checkstyle pathes are in JIRA:
http://issues.apache.org/struts/browse/STR-2900
I'd be happy to do another round after these are applied, if time allows
before the next release is rolled. In any case, this addresses around
2,150 issues, give or take a few.
Frank
Frank W. Zamm
On 6/21/06, Frank W. Zammetti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I'll see what I can do over the weekend...
I'd suggest opening several JIRA issues, at least one per component
(core, taglib, etc.) depending on how you decide to organize the
patches.
Ideally anyone could review the patch(es), commit a
Ted, do you have any preference on how the patches should come in? One
per package, one per source file, etc?
Frank
Frank W. Zammetti wrote:
I'll see what I can do over the weekend...
Frank
Ted Husted wrote:
On 6/21/06, Niall Pemberton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Unfortunately doesn't look
I'll see what I can do over the weekend...
Frank
Ted Husted wrote:
On 6/21/06, Niall Pemberton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Unfortunately doesn't look like I'm going to find time to do this,
I can make time in the first week of July, and it doesn't sound like
anyone else will have time before
On 6/21/06, Niall Pemberton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Unfortunately doesn't look like I'm going to find time to do this,
I can make time in the first week of July, and it doesn't sound like
anyone else will have time before then. So if anyone wants to drum up
some checkstyle patches, it looks
On 6/15/06, Niall Pemberton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 6/15/06, Frank W. Zammetti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, June 15, 2006 6:35 am, Ted Husted wrote:
>
> > In the meantime, that would give Frank time to work on those patches.
>
> So you don't want to wait for GA now? That's fine wit
Ted Husted wrote:
We don't like to make sweeping changes right *after* a popular
release, because it fouls up patches people might submit based on the
source for that release.It's a matter of degree and how many files are
touched.
Ok, sorry, I wasn't remembering the previous conversations prope
On 6/20/06, Frank W. Zammetti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
after the next milestone (or was it after GA? I'm not sure), so as soon
as we hit that, I'll jump right on all this.
We don't like to make sweeping changes right *after* a popular
release, because it fouls up patches people might submit
Martin Cooper wrote:
I'm with you - I'd prefer to fix them, rather than ignore them.
Cool. I suspect most would agree with that as well.
The consensus I believe was to hold off on any actual changes until
after the next milestone (or was it after GA? I'm not sure), so as soon
as we hit tha
On 6/20/06, Frank W. Zammetti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
So, I'm looking through the Checkstyle results for all SAF1 subprojects
to see if there is anything else that can and maybe should be addressed
by rule changes... one particular complaint that shows up an awful lot
is the "Line has trailin
So, I'm looking through the Checkstyle results for all SAF1 subprojects
to see if there is anything else that can and maybe should be addressed
by rule changes... one particular complaint that shows up an awful lot
is the "Line has trailing spaces" complaint.
My own opinion is that all the sou
On 6/15/06, Frank W. Zammetti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Ted Husted wrote:
> You might at least want to start those discussions about the
> checkstyle settings, so that we can develop a strategy about how they
> would be fixed the next time there is a window of opportunity.
Fair enough...
I sa
On Mon, June 19, 2006 1:02 pm, Laurie Harper wrote:
> Since this is a change to the checkstyle rules, not a change to the
> codebase, I don't think it needs to wait for a release/GA/whatever.
> Might as well just get it done now...
Sounds good. Tell you what... it's a minor change, but I'll creat
Frank W. Zammetti wrote:
Ted Husted wrote:
You might at least want to start those discussions about the
checkstyle settings, so that we can develop a strategy about how they
would be fixed the next time there is a window of opportunity.
Fair enough...
I saw two issues that seem to account for
Ted Husted wrote:
You might at least want to start those discussions about the
checkstyle settings, so that we can develop a strategy about how they
would be fixed the next time there is a window of opportunity.
Fair enough...
I saw two issues that seem to account for a large number of the
co
You might at least want to start those discussions about the
checkstyle settings, so that we can develop a strategy about how they
would be fixed the next time there is a window of opportunity.
When I did a a time study in February, curing the the current errors
with the current settings would ta
Ok, my head is spinning :)
I like simple, so, I'll say the same thing I remember saying months ago...
just ping me when the time is right to deal with Checkstyle complaints,
and so long as I still have some free time then, I'll do it.
You have someone willing to do the work, I'll let you worry ab
The problem is patches. People will tend to write patches against
whatever version they are using. If we make a lot of changes right
after a popular release, then a lot of the patches people submit back
won't work. The ideal time for broad refactorings is at the beginning
of a minor series (pre #.
Ok, cool Niall... I guess we maybe need to decide what the "wait point"
really is here... do we want to wait for GA before I generate these
patches, or just the next release? At first I thought Ted was saying
let's wait for GA, but then it sounded like maybe just wait for 1.3.5
(which may or may n
On 6/15/06, Frank W. Zammetti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Thu, June 15, 2006 6:35 am, Ted Husted wrote:
> In the meantime, that would give Frank time to work on those patches.
So you don't want to wait for GA now? That's fine with me... I'm not sure
I can take care of all the complaints by J
On Thu, June 15, 2006 6:35 am, Ted Husted wrote:
> In the meantime, that would give Frank time to work on those patches.
So you don't want to wait for GA now? That's fine with me... I'm not sure
I can take care of all the complaints by July, but I should be able to get
rid of enough of them to m
If no one else wants to step up, then I can do it first thing come
July, but not before.
In the meantime, that would give Frank time to work on those patches.
-Ted.
On 6/14/06, Wendy Smoak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 6/13/06, Ted Husted <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Right now, Wendy has been
On 6/13/06, Ted Husted <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Right now, Wendy has been publishing 1.3.5 snapshots, and she may be
ready for another try at a release. I don't know if we want to get
into this again now or after we have a GA 1.3.
The 1.3 distribution is in good shape, I think, (but I've tho
Ok, that's no problem. Waiting might be better, especially since it
looks like at least some of it involves rule tweaking, and hence I'd
think some discussion. I don't want to do anything that makes getting
to GA more difficult, so I'm ok with coming back to it later.
Frank
Ted Husted wrote
On 6/13/06, Frank W. Zammetti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi Ted... I wouldn't say there's no one interested in fixing the errors
:) I offered to do it some time ago, and I'm still willing (and my time
has freed up again, so able as well!)
Unforutnately, it seems to be a timing issue. If the pa
Hi Ted... I wouldn't say there's no one interested in fixing the errors
:) I offered to do it some time ago, and I'm still willing (and my time
has freed up again, so able as well!)
I just started going through them... my plan was to do one package in
Core and see if anyone was willing to com
26 matches
Mail list logo
