You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to issues@maven.apache.org by "Vincent Siveton (JIRA)" <ji...@codehaus.org> on 2008/07/11 18:13:26 UTC
[jira] Created: (MCHECKSTYLE-98) Maven Checkstyle is too strict and
not follow Maven's team conventions!
Maven Checkstyle is too strict and not follow Maven's team conventions!
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Key: MCHECKSTYLE-98
URL: http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MCHECKSTYLE-98
Project: Maven 2.x Checkstyle Plugin
Issue Type: Task
Affects Versions: 2.2
Reporter: Vincent Siveton
Attachments: maven_style_improvements.diff, site-MPIR-improvements.zip, site-MPIR-r675999.zip
The Checkstyle report is an official part of the Maven's project website. Release manager needs to review it before cutting a release.
Actually, the Maven Checkstyle conf is too strict and not following our conventions.
Lets take the MPIR project (rev 675999) and see site-MPIR-r675999.zip attachment. There is a lot of unuseful info/warn ie "Missing a Javadoc comment" or "Expected @param tag for..."
I propose to modify the current Maven style (see maven_style_improvements.diff). You could see results in site-MPIR-improvements.zip
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators: http://jira.codehaus.org/secure/Administrators.jspa
-
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
[jira] Commented: (MCHECKSTYLE-98) Maven Checkstyle is too strict
and not follow Maven's team conventions!
Posted by "Dennis Lundberg (JIRA)" <ji...@codehaus.org>.
[ http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MCHECKSTYLE-98?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=141578#action_141578 ]
Dennis Lundberg commented on MCHECKSTYLE-98:
--------------------------------------------
Adding scope=protected to the Javadoc* modules is a good idea.
However I don't think we should add the allow* options. That lowers the bar for documentation too much. If we set the allow* options, we are saying that it's OK to *not* document parameters and return values for public and protected methods. I don't support that.
The configuration addition to the VisibilityModifier module is OK by me.
> Maven Checkstyle is too strict and not follow Maven's team conventions!
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: MCHECKSTYLE-98
> URL: http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MCHECKSTYLE-98
> Project: Maven 2.x Checkstyle Plugin
> Issue Type: Task
> Affects Versions: 2.2
> Reporter: Vincent Siveton
> Attachments: maven_style_improvements.diff, site-MPIR-improvements.zip, site-MPIR-r675999.zip
>
>
> The Checkstyle report is an official part of the Maven's project website. Release manager needs to review it before cutting a release.
> Actually, the Maven Checkstyle conf is too strict and not following our conventions.
> Lets take the MPIR project (rev 675999) and see site-MPIR-r675999.zip attachment. There is a lot of unuseful info/warn ie "Missing a Javadoc comment" or "Expected @param tag for..."
> I propose to modify the current Maven style (see maven_style_improvements.diff). You could see results in site-MPIR-improvements.zip
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators: http://jira.codehaus.org/secure/Administrators.jspa
-
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
[jira] Updated: (MCHECKSTYLE-98) Maven Checkstyle is too strict and
not follow Maven's team conventions!
Posted by "Benjamin Bentmann (JIRA)" <ji...@codehaus.org>.
[ http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MCHECKSTYLE-98?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ]
Benjamin Bentmann updated MCHECKSTYLE-98:
-----------------------------------------
Attachment: hidden-field.patch
I agree with Dennis, I don't feel that tolerating missing javadoc is a good choice. Undocumented code is hard to maintain and provokes bugs due to wrong assumptions.
Another suggestion: Is the {{HiddenField}} check really useful? I like private helper methods that don't access mojo parameters directly but rather get them in via method parameters (to make data flow more clearly, shared memory programming is obscure). Coming up with distinct names for the method parameter and the corresponding mojo parameter doesn't seem senseful to me.
> Maven Checkstyle is too strict and not follow Maven's team conventions!
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: MCHECKSTYLE-98
> URL: http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MCHECKSTYLE-98
> Project: Maven 2.x Checkstyle Plugin
> Issue Type: Task
> Affects Versions: 2.2
> Reporter: Vincent Siveton
> Attachments: hidden-field.patch, maven_style_improvements.diff, site-MPIR-improvements.zip, site-MPIR-r675999.zip
>
>
> The Checkstyle report is an official part of the Maven's project website. Release manager needs to review it before cutting a release.
> Actually, the Maven Checkstyle conf is too strict and not following our conventions.
> Lets take the MPIR project (rev 675999) and see site-MPIR-r675999.zip attachment. There is a lot of unuseful info/warn ie "Missing a Javadoc comment" or "Expected @param tag for..."
> I propose to modify the current Maven style (see maven_style_improvements.diff). You could see results in site-MPIR-improvements.zip
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators: http://jira.codehaus.org/secure/Administrators.jspa
-
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
[jira] Commented: (MCHECKSTYLE-98) Maven Checkstyle is too strict
and not follow Maven's team conventions!
Posted by "Olivier Lamy (JIRA)" <ji...@codehaus.org>.
[ http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MCHECKSTYLE-98?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=142672#action_142672 ]
Olivier Lamy commented on MCHECKSTYLE-98:
-----------------------------------------
+1 from me.
> Maven Checkstyle is too strict and not follow Maven's team conventions!
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: MCHECKSTYLE-98
> URL: http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MCHECKSTYLE-98
> Project: Maven 2.x Checkstyle Plugin
> Issue Type: Task
> Affects Versions: 2.2
> Reporter: Vincent Siveton
> Attachments: maven_style_improvements.diff, site-MPIR-improvements.zip, site-MPIR-r675999.zip
>
>
> The Checkstyle report is an official part of the Maven's project website. Release manager needs to review it before cutting a release.
> Actually, the Maven Checkstyle conf is too strict and not following our conventions.
> Lets take the MPIR project (rev 675999) and see site-MPIR-r675999.zip attachment. There is a lot of unuseful info/warn ie "Missing a Javadoc comment" or "Expected @param tag for..."
> I propose to modify the current Maven style (see maven_style_improvements.diff). You could see results in site-MPIR-improvements.zip
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators: http://jira.codehaus.org/secure/Administrators.jspa
-
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
[jira] Closed: (MCHECKSTYLE-98) Maven Checkstyle is too strict and
not follow Maven's team conventions!
Posted by "Dennis Lundberg (JIRA)" <ji...@codehaus.org>.
[ http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MCHECKSTYLE-98?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ]
Dennis Lundberg closed MCHECKSTYLE-98.
--------------------------------------
Assignee: Dennis Lundberg
Resolution: Fixed
Fix Version/s: 2.3
I've applied the changes agreed upon, see my previous comment.
I have not applied Benjamin's patch, since that check only produces warnings. At this point in time my main concern is getting errors reported for the right things.
> Maven Checkstyle is too strict and not follow Maven's team conventions!
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: MCHECKSTYLE-98
> URL: http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MCHECKSTYLE-98
> Project: Maven 2.x Checkstyle Plugin
> Issue Type: Task
> Affects Versions: 2.2
> Reporter: Vincent Siveton
> Assignee: Dennis Lundberg
> Fix For: 2.3
>
> Attachments: hidden-field.patch, maven_style_improvements.diff, site-MPIR-improvements.zip, site-MPIR-r675999.zip
>
>
> The Checkstyle report is an official part of the Maven's project website. Release manager needs to review it before cutting a release.
> Actually, the Maven Checkstyle conf is too strict and not following our conventions.
> Lets take the MPIR project (rev 675999) and see site-MPIR-r675999.zip attachment. There is a lot of unuseful info/warn ie "Missing a Javadoc comment" or "Expected @param tag for..."
> I propose to modify the current Maven style (see maven_style_improvements.diff). You could see results in site-MPIR-improvements.zip
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators: http://jira.codehaus.org/secure/Administrators.jspa
-
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira