Joe,
I like your proposal.

On Sat, Mar 21, 2015 at 11:18 AM, Joe Witt <[email protected]> wrote:

> Folks,
>
> Benson put in a ticket a while back:
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NIFI-271 to make a DRY
> nifi-parent we can extend from in the main nifi line and the
> nifi-nar-plugin.
>
> Proposal:
> 1) Do what Benson said.
> 2) In that nifi-parent ensure checkstyle is always run and thus
> consistent across any nifi item.  Fail the build if any violations.
> 3) In that nifi-parent ensure check-licenses is always run and if any
> fails - fail the build.
>
> Commentary:
> - This is not as forgiving as Sean suggested but it also does not
> preclude us from doing the QC bot to check higher order items.
> - This is more in-line with Adam's suggestion but gives the
> contributor direct feedback on what is wrong that they can resolve on
> their own without us rejecting their PR.  This I am guessing was
> Adam's real intent anyway.
> - I will go through an make sure all existing code is in-line with the
> checkstyle form that we will create.  That will require very loud
> music and good drinks but whatever - about as much fun as it was
> getting all the licensing squared away.
>
> I noticed that accumulo has this nicely integrated into their build so
> that gives a great example to follow.
>
> Thanks
> Joe
>
> On Tue, Mar 17, 2015 at 10:44 PM, Joe Witt <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Sean:
> >
> > Nope we're still pretty basic.
> >
> > Thanks
> > Joe
> >
> > On Tue, Mar 17, 2015 at 10:41 PM, Sean Busbey <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> >> On Tue, Mar 17, 2015 at 9:32 PM, Joe Witt <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On the thread itself: Anyone interested in pushing forward the
> >>> model/changes to get the formatting process smoothed out please do so.
> >>>
> >>>
> >> Do y'all have a QA bot yet? I'm looking to coalesce the pre-commit
> testing
> >> of Hadoop and HBase in the next ~2-4 weeks. Having a third unrelated
> >> project to throw against that would help me ensure I have something
> >> reusable that can spread across ASF projects.
> >>
> >> We haven't determined yet where the shared pre-commit checker will live,
> >> but we don't seem too opinionated yet so it's unlikely we'll need lots
> of
> >> changes.
> >>
> >> --
> >> Sean
>

Reply via email to