You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@felix.apache.org by Stefano Lenzi <ki...@interfree.it> on 2007/09/20 19:45:17 UTC
Felix Coding Style
Hi All,
I would like to discuss two point:
- Should Felix use only a Code Style or should rely on other project
code style when the component created by Felix is used into other
projects? For instance: should the Maven plugin maintained by Felix use
the Maven code style or Felix code style?
- I know that Clement has create a Checksytle and a Eclipse formatter
complaint to the Felix coding style. I think that we reserve a location
in our repository for providing such file to developer and also try to
keep it updated. It's worth to notice that the Checkstyle configuration
file could be both by Maven and IDE.
Ciao,
Stefano "Kismet" Lenzi
Re: Plugins and wrappers (Was: Re: Felix Coding Style)
Posted by Stuart McCulloch <st...@jayway.net>.
On 21/09/2007, Richard S. Hall <he...@ungoverned.org> wrote:
>
> Marcel Offermans wrote:
> > On Sep 20, 2007, at 21:37 , Richard S. Hall wrote:
> >
> >
> >> For me, I am not so sure about this one. I am not sure if makes
> >> sense, for example, for us to donate the bundle plugin to Maven,
> >> since the area of expertise around OSGi is in Felix, so if people
> >> have questions about stuff they will likely want answers from us, not
> >> from Maven guys. However, if Maven started to become much more
> >> OSGi-centered, then my position on this could change.
> >
> >> From my point of view, it makes sense that we (i.e., Felix community)
> >> develop tools that make it easier for people to use Felix (e.g.,
> >> bundleplugin). The fact that bundleplugin uses Maven is just an
> >> implementation issue. For example, mangen does a similar job as
> >> bundleplugin, but it is not based on maven, so what would we do with
> >> that? Of course, we wouldn't do anything with it. The point is that
> >> we are making tools to help people use Felix and these tools should
> >> be part of the Felix project, no matter what technology they are
> >> implemented on top of.
> >
> > That's another way to look at things. Another approach could be to not
> > only donate the code to other projects, but (as a figure of speech)
> > donate the developer(s) too and have them maintain the code in another
> > project.
>
> To me, this would just dilute the expertise in the Felix community and
> would require that users know where to ask their OSGi questions, rather
> than just coming to Felix for all of their OSGi questions.
another benefit of keeping such tools/plugins at Felix is that people may
drop by looking for a plugin and find out about the framework - if all the
tools were on other sites they could end up sticking with Equinox ;)
> Then again, it also depends on the scope of the Felix project. Do we
> > only implement the core framework? Or core plus compendium? Or that
> > plus other useful bundles? Or even including development utilities and
> > plugins? A lot of what we do is not bound to the framework anyway, but
> > can be used in any OSGi framework.
>
> Well, I am pretty sure the proposal said that we will try to do the
> entire spec (core + compendium), plus try to advance OSGi technology
> with our own ideas and projects too. So, the scope is actually quite
> large. :-)
>
> -> richard
>
>
> >
> > Greetings, Marcel
> >
>
--
Cheers, Stuart
Re: Plugins and wrappers (Was: Re: Felix Coding Style)
Posted by "Richard S. Hall" <he...@ungoverned.org>.
Marcel Offermans wrote:
> On Sep 20, 2007, at 21:37 , Richard S. Hall wrote:
>
>
>> For me, I am not so sure about this one. I am not sure if makes
>> sense, for example, for us to donate the bundle plugin to Maven,
>> since the area of expertise around OSGi is in Felix, so if people
>> have questions about stuff they will likely want answers from us, not
>> from Maven guys. However, if Maven started to become much more
>> OSGi-centered, then my position on this could change.
>
>> From my point of view, it makes sense that we (i.e., Felix community)
>> develop tools that make it easier for people to use Felix (e.g.,
>> bundleplugin). The fact that bundleplugin uses Maven is just an
>> implementation issue. For example, mangen does a similar job as
>> bundleplugin, but it is not based on maven, so what would we do with
>> that? Of course, we wouldn't do anything with it. The point is that
>> we are making tools to help people use Felix and these tools should
>> be part of the Felix project, no matter what technology they are
>> implemented on top of.
>
> That's another way to look at things. Another approach could be to not
> only donate the code to other projects, but (as a figure of speech)
> donate the developer(s) too and have them maintain the code in another
> project.
To me, this would just dilute the expertise in the Felix community and
would require that users know where to ask their OSGi questions, rather
than just coming to Felix for all of their OSGi questions.
> Then again, it also depends on the scope of the Felix project. Do we
> only implement the core framework? Or core plus compendium? Or that
> plus other useful bundles? Or even including development utilities and
> plugins? A lot of what we do is not bound to the framework anyway, but
> can be used in any OSGi framework.
Well, I am pretty sure the proposal said that we will try to do the
entire spec (core + compendium), plus try to advance OSGi technology
with our own ideas and projects too. So, the scope is actually quite
large. :-)
-> richard
>
> Greetings, Marcel
>
Plugins and wrappers (Was: Re: Felix Coding Style)
Posted by Marcel Offermans <ma...@luminis.nl>.
On Sep 20, 2007, at 21:37 , Richard S. Hall wrote:
>> Another issue, but that's not the discussion of this thread, is if
>> we should maintain for example Maven plugins in the Felix project
>> at all. We had the same discussion for the commons wrappers
>> already. Eventually, I would like to donate those pieces of code
>> to the respective projects.
> For me, I am not so sure about this one. I am not sure if makes
> sense, for example, for us to donate the bundle plugin to Maven,
> since the area of expertise around OSGi is in Felix, so if people
> have questions about stuff they will likely want answers from us,
> not from Maven guys. However, if Maven started to become much more
> OSGi-centered, then my position on this could change.
> From my point of view, it makes sense that we (i.e., Felix
> community) develop tools that make it easier for people to use
> Felix (e.g., bundleplugin). The fact that bundleplugin uses Maven
> is just an implementation issue. For example, mangen does a similar
> job as bundleplugin, but it is not based on maven, so what would we
> do with that? Of course, we wouldn't do anything with it. The point
> is that we are making tools to help people use Felix and these
> tools should be part of the Felix project, no matter what
> technology they are implemented on top of.
That's another way to look at things. Another approach could be to
not only donate the code to other projects, but (as a figure of
speech) donate the developer(s) too and have them maintain the code
in another project.
Then again, it also depends on the scope of the Felix project. Do we
only implement the core framework? Or core plus compendium? Or that
plus other useful bundles? Or even including development utilities
and plugins? A lot of what we do is not bound to the framework
anyway, but can be used in any OSGi framework.
Greetings, Marcel
RE: Felix Coding Style
Posted by Clement Escoffier <cl...@gmail.com>.
Hello,
Of course, I donate these files :
http://clement.plop-plop.net/downloads/style/
(Checkstyle can directly point on it)
But to be honest, I do not follow the Apache coding standard (specially on
'{' and '}' position and empty line). That's why there is an iPOJO
checkstyle file.
Clement
> -----Message d'origine-----
> De : Marcel Offermans [mailto:marcel.offermans@luminis.nl]
> Envoyé : samedi 22 septembre 2007 10:36
> À : dev@felix.apache.org
> Objet : Re: Felix Coding Style
>
> On Sep 22, 2007, at 3:01 , Stefano Lenzi wrote:
>
> > OK! So I would like to ask to Clement to donate it's code style
> > definition and save them somewhere in the repository, maybe in the
> > tools or a new codestyle folder.
> > So after that we could add a checkstyle report to Felix POM in
> > order to easily track project which does not match the standard
> > coding.
>
> That makes sense, then the continuous build we run can report this too.
Re: Felix Coding Style
Posted by Marcel Offermans <ma...@luminis.nl>.
On Sep 22, 2007, at 3:01 , Stefano Lenzi wrote:
> OK! So I would like to ask to Clement to donate it's code style
> definition and save them somewhere in the repository, maybe in the
> tools or a new codestyle folder.
> So after that we could add a checkstyle report to Felix POM in
> order to easily track project which does not match the standard
> coding.
That makes sense, then the continuous build we run can report this too.
Re: Felix Coding Style
Posted by Stefano Lenzi <ki...@interfree.it>.
Richard S. Hall wrote:
> Marcel Offermans wrote:
>> Hi Stefano,
>>
>> On Sep 20, 2007, at 19:45 , Stefano Lenzi wrote:
>>
>>> I would like to discuss two point:
[cut]
>>> - I know that Clement has create a Checksytle and a Eclipse
>>> formatter complaint to the Felix coding style. I think that we
>>> reserve a location in our repository for providing such file to
>>> developer and also try to keep it updated. It's worth to notice that
>>> the Checkstyle configuration file could be both by Maven and IDE.
>>
>> The most important thing is to maintain a document that describes our
>> code style. Everything else is optional in my opinion, since probably
>> we all have different preferences when it comes to IDE's. That said, I
>> do appreciate the fact that Clement has provided these files. I don't
>> care if they're maintained in svn or the wiki however.
>
> Agreed.
>
> -> richard
>
>>
>> Greetings, Marcel
>>
>
OK! So I would like to ask to Clement to donate it's code style
definition and save them somewhere in the repository, maybe in the tools
or a new codestyle folder.
So after that we could add a checkstyle report to Felix POM in order to
easily track project which does not match the standard coding.
Re: Felix Coding Style
Posted by "Richard S. Hall" <he...@ungoverned.org>.
Marcel Offermans wrote:
> Hi Stefano,
>
> On Sep 20, 2007, at 19:45 , Stefano Lenzi wrote:
>
>> I would like to discuss two point:
>
>> - Should Felix use only a Code Style or should rely on other project
>> code style when the component created by Felix is used into other
>> projects? For instance: should the Maven plugin maintained by Felix
>> use the Maven code style or Felix code style?
>
> I think that everything we develop in our repository should use the
> code style we defined. Using code styles of other projects seems more
> confusing to me.
+1
> Another issue, but that's not the discussion of this thread, is if we
> should maintain for example Maven plugins in the Felix project at all.
> We had the same discussion for the commons wrappers already.
> Eventually, I would like to donate those pieces of code to the
> respective projects.
>
> But, back to this discussion...
For me, I am not so sure about this one. I am not sure if makes sense,
for example, for us to donate the bundle plugin to Maven, since the area
of expertise around OSGi is in Felix, so if people have questions about
stuff they will likely want answers from us, not from Maven guys.
However, if Maven started to become much more OSGi-centered, then my
position on this could change.
From my point of view, it makes sense that we (i.e., Felix community)
develop tools that make it easier for people to use Felix (e.g.,
bundleplugin). The fact that bundleplugin uses Maven is just an
implementation issue. For example, mangen does a similar job as
bundleplugin, but it is not based on maven, so what would we do with
that? Of course, we wouldn't do anything with it. The point is that we
are making tools to help people use Felix and these tools should be part
of the Felix project, no matter what technology they are implemented on
top of.
>> - I know that Clement has create a Checksytle and a Eclipse
>> formatter complaint to the Felix coding style. I think that we
>> reserve a location in our repository for providing such file to
>> developer and also try to keep it updated. It's worth to notice that
>> the Checkstyle configuration file could be both by Maven and IDE.
>
> The most important thing is to maintain a document that describes our
> code style. Everything else is optional in my opinion, since probably
> we all have different preferences when it comes to IDE's. That said, I
> do appreciate the fact that Clement has provided these files. I don't
> care if they're maintained in svn or the wiki however.
Agreed.
-> richard
>
> Greetings, Marcel
>
Re: Felix Coding Style
Posted by Stuart McCulloch <st...@jayway.net>.
On 21/09/2007, Marcel Offermans <ma...@luminis.nl> wrote:
>
> I think that everything we develop in our repository should use the
> code style we defined. Using code styles of other projects seems more
> confusing to me.
agreed - I'm hoping to apply the Felix coding standard to the bundleplugin
at some point
--
Cheers, Stuart
Re: Felix Coding Style
Posted by Marcel Offermans <ma...@luminis.nl>.
Hi Stefano,
On Sep 20, 2007, at 19:45 , Stefano Lenzi wrote:
> I would like to discuss two point:
> - Should Felix use only a Code Style or should rely on other
> project code style when the component created by Felix is used into
> other projects? For instance: should the Maven plugin maintained by
> Felix use the Maven code style or Felix code style?
I think that everything we develop in our repository should use the
code style we defined. Using code styles of other projects seems more
confusing to me.
Another issue, but that's not the discussion of this thread, is if we
should maintain for example Maven plugins in the Felix project at
all. We had the same discussion for the commons wrappers already.
Eventually, I would like to donate those pieces of code to the
respective projects.
But, back to this discussion...
> - I know that Clement has create a Checksytle and a Eclipse
> formatter complaint to the Felix coding style. I think that we
> reserve a location in our repository for providing such file to
> developer and also try to keep it updated. It's worth to notice
> that the Checkstyle configuration file could be both by Maven and IDE.
The most important thing is to maintain a document that describes our
code style. Everything else is optional in my opinion, since probably
we all have different preferences when it comes to IDE's. That said,
I do appreciate the fact that Clement has provided these files. I
don't care if they're maintained in svn or the wiki however.
Greetings, Marcel