ignite-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Peter Ivanov <mr.wei...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Code inspection
Date Wed, 28 Mar 2018 18:19:17 GMT
Anton, Dmitry is right.

We have to manually add condition when to consider build faulty based on
how many failed inspection are there.

For now I see this initiative as follows:
- find more or less correct set of inspections (there are lots of typos and
other irrelevant to code execution inspections) looking on the results of
core module build, as it has ~85% of target code;
- add all modules to composite project and setup schedule at least once a
week.


On Wed, 28 Mar 2018 at 19:09, Dmitry Pavlov <dpavlov.spb@gmail.com> wrote:

> Inspection suites should be failed manually by some fail condition.
>
> This question will become actual in future. How to fail such suite on TC?
>
> ср, 28 мар. 2018 г. в 18:54, Anton Vinogradov <av@apache.org>:
>
> > Peter,
> >
> > Why 44 errors are green?
> >
> >
> >
> https://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewLog.html?buildId=1145974&tab=buildResultsDiv&buildTypeId=IgniteTests24Java8_InspectionsAop
> >
> > 2018-03-28 16:27 GMT+03:00 Petr Ivanov <mr.weider@gmail.com>:
> >
> > > After several problems, example run on Aleksey’s configuration is
> > > complete: https://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewLog.html?buildId=1164652 <
> > > https://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewLog.html?buildId=1164652>
> > >
> > >
> > > > On 28 Mar 2018, at 10:28, Petr Ivanov <mr.weider@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Started https://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewLog.html?buildId=1164002 <
> > > https://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewQueued.html?itemId=1163998> with
> > > Aleksey’s inspections profile.
> > > > Core (long) and AOP (short) modules will be tested as example.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >> On 27 Mar 2018, at 19:38, Dmitry Pavlov <dpavlov.spb@gmail.com
> > <mailto:
> > > dpavlov.spb@gmail.com>> wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >> Hi Petr,
> > > >>
> > > >> Could you please take inspections and run it on AI code base in
> > > >> https://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewType.html?buildTypeId=
> > >
> IgniteTests24Java8_InspectionsCore&branch_IgniteTests24Java8=%3Cdefault%
> > > 3E&tab=buildTypeStatusDiv <https://ci.ignite.apache.org/
> > > viewType.html?buildTypeId=IgniteTests24Java8_InspectionsCore&branch_
> > > IgniteTests24Java8=%3Cdefault%3E&tab=buildTypeStatusDiv>
> > > >> ?
> > > >>
> > > >> Sincerely,
> > > >> Dmitriy Pavlov
> > > >>
> > > >> вт, 27 мар. 2018 г. в 19:27, Dmitry Pavlov <dpavlov.spb@gmail.com>:
> > > >>
> > > >>> Alexey, thank you for bring this topic to top.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> What do you think about committing this inspections into Ignite
> code
> > > base?
> > > >>>
> > > >>> What can be our next steps after demonstrating CI check is possible
> > > >>> https://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewType.html?buildTypeId=
> > >
> IgniteTests24Java8_InspectionsCore&branch_IgniteTests24Java8=%3Cdefault%
> > > 3E&tab=buildTypeStatusDiv
> > > >>> ?
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Sincerely,
> > > >>> Dmitriy Pavlov
> > > >>>
> > > >>> вт, 27 мар. 2018 г. в 15:28, Alexey Goncharuk <
> > > alexey.goncharuk@gmail.com
> > > >>>> :
> > > >>>
> > > >>>> Bumping up.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> Attached is my local inspections profile exported from Idea.
Let's
> > run
> > > >>>> the first iteration and check if it differs significantly
from
> other
> > > >>>> community members.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> --AG
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> 2018-03-19 16:39 GMT+03:00 Petr Ivanov <mr.weider@gmail.com>:
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>> Filed https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-7985
<
> > > >>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-7985>
[1].
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>>> On 18 Mar 2018, at 00:56, Dmitry Pavlov <dpavlov.spb@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>> Hello Petr,
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>> Many members of the community would appreciate such
additional
> > code
> > > >>>>> control, and it's a pity that no one made this happen.
Agree?
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>> Could you please pick up this activity?
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>> It might be an idea to create 'IDEA Inspections' step
to be run
> in
> > > >>>>> parallel with 'Build Apache Ignite'. WDYT? Would it work?
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>> Sincerely,
> > > >>>>>> Dmitriy Pavlov
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> https://confluence.jetbrains.com/display/TCD10/Inspections
<
> > > >>>>> https://confluence.jetbrains.com/display/TCD10/Inspections>
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>> пн, 12 мар. 2018 г. в 14:37, Dmitry Pavlov
<
> dpavlov.spb@gmail.com
> > > >>>>> <mailto:dpavlov.spb@gmail.com>>:
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>>> Hi Dmitriy,
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>> would you pick up this activity?
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>> Sincerely,
> > > >>>>>> Dmitriy Pavlov
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> вт, 6 мар. 2018 г. в 14:09, Dmitry Pavlov <dpavlov.spb@gmail.com
> > > >>>>> <mailto:dpavlov.spb@gmail.com>>:
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>>> What I can suggest now it is to take XML file with
existing as
> is
> > > from
> > > >>>>> previous topic (I remember someone in community already
prepared
> > > settings)
> > > >>>>> and set up TeamCity Run configuration as part of Run All
Basic
> > Tests
> > > (per
> > > >>>>> commit basis).
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>> If we don’t have XML, I suggest to enable build-in
Idea
> > inspections
> > > >>>>> 'as is' on TeamCity and iteratively improve it according
to found
> > > issues.
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>> Dmitriy G., would you prepare PR and proof-of-concept
TC run
> > > >>>>> configuration?
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>> As discussion became really active, I think that means
community
> > is
> > > >>>>> interested in static code checks.
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> вт, 6 мар. 2018 г. в 14:08, Dmitry Pavlov <dpavlov.spb@gmail.com
> > > >>>>> <mailto:dpavlov.spb@gmail.com>>:
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>>> I was thinking about some quick check, which will
automatically
> > > >>>>> require minimum runs. Now, any committer can push changes
to the
> > > master,
> > > >>>>> which break not only the inspection and style, but even
the
> > > compilation. If
> > > >>>>> this control would be automatic, it can allow us make
codebase
> > > better quite
> > > >>>>> fast. But I am afraid it is not realistic.
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> вт, 6 мар. 2018 г. в 13:42, Petr Ivanov <mr.weider@gmail.com
> > > <mailto:
> > > >>>>> 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
> > > >>>>> <mailto: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 <mailto: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
> > > <mailto:
> > > >>>>> 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 <mailto: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 <mailto: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
<
> > > >>>>> 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 <mailto: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
> <
> > > >>>>> https://www.jetbrains.com/help/idea/code-inspection.html>>
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>

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