ignite-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Maxim Muzafarov <maxmu...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Code inspection
Date Tue, 06 Mar 2018 11:06:58 GMT
Can we use also Sonar for codestyle (may be some additional code checks)
checks on each PR?


вт, 6 мар. 2018 г. в 13:42, Petr Ivanov <mr.weider@gmail.com>:

> Sonar is powerful, yes, but it’s power in thoroughness. I.e. it does its
> job well in cases of leisurely post-build analysis.
>
> I’d suggest we use it (if we will use it) in the following scenarios:
>  — some basic checks Sonar profile for Blocker bugs (it is fast) —
> something that cannot be passed to master;
>  — nightly or even weekly run with Full Sonar profile (600+ checks from
> Firebug, Codestyle, Coverage, etc.) for regression and overall code quality
> improvement goals.
>
> Did not quite get you about push-to-master prohibition. Can you explain
> scenario in more details?
>
>
> > On 6 Mar 2018, at 13:27, Dmitry Pavlov <dpavlov.spb@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Petr, I've heard Sonar is powerful tool.
> >
> > Would it help us to prohibit commits to master w/o test run / too much
> > failed tests / too much inspection errors appeared?
> >
> > вт, 6 мар. 2018 г. в 13:22, Alexey Goncharuk <alexey.goncharuk@gmail.com
> >:
> >
> >> Dmitriy,
> >>
> >> I like this idea a lot. For example, the inspection profile should have
> >> inspection 'Anonymous class can be converted to lambda' disabled because
> >> quite a lot of such classes can be sent over the network (although even
> >> anonymous classes are discourage for such purposes).
> >>
> >> I believe we can start with sharing somehow one of the profiles and then
> >> iteratively improving it until the community is satisfied with the
> result.
> >>
> >> Thoughts?
> >>
> >> 2018-03-06 12:06 GMT+03:00 Petr Ivanov <mr.weider@gmail.com>:
> >>
> >>> We can use Sonar as instrument for code analysis and test coverage
> >>> inspections.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> On 6 Mar 2018, at 11:28, Dmitriy Govorukhin <
> >>> dmitriy.govorukhin@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> Dmitriy,
> >>>>
> >>>> As I understood, preview topic was of static code analysis in general.
> >>>> In this topic, I want to discuss only idea inspection rule.
> >>>> In future, of course, we can expаnd this rule to the TeamCity build.
> >>>>
> >>>> On Tue, Mar 6, 2018 at 11:16 AM, Nikolay Izhikov <nizhikov@apache.org
> >
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> Hello, Igniters.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> +1 to automatic code style tools.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Let's make it already!
> >>>>> Do we have a ticket for it?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Related discussion -
> >> http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.
> >>>>> com/Static-code-analysis-for-Java-td22195.html
> >>>>>
> >>>>> В Вт, 06/03/2018 в 08:15 +0000, Dmitry Pavlov пишет:
> >>>>>> Hi Dmitriy,
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I think we should resurrect thread about addition of code
> >> inspections,
> >>>>> and
> >>>>>> later we can enable automatic control step to TeamCity.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Could you help me to find it?
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> вт, 6 мар. 2018 г. в 11:11, Dmitriy Govorukhin <
> >>>>> dmitriy.govorukhin@gmail.com
> >>>>>>> :
> >>>>>>> Hi folks,
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Do we have 'inspection' [1] scheme for ignite?
> >>>>>>> I see a lot of warnings in my code, and I guess it is because
> >> everyone
> >>>>> uses
> >>>>>>> different schemes.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Let's start the discussion.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> [1] IDEA inspection
> >>>>>>> <https://www.jetbrains.com/help/idea/code-inspection.html>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
>
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message