[ http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MCHECKSTYLE-38?page=comments#action_63122
]
Vincent Massol commented on MCHECKSTYLE-38:
-------------------------------------------
{quote}
Is it unreasonable to fail on warnings?
{quote}
Yes it's unreasonable as this is not the behavior of checkstyle itself. Also,
Maven 1.x checkstyle plugin does not fail on warnings by default.
{quote}
Would introducing a parameter that let them choose, defaulting to the current
behaviour be acceptable?
{quote}
Yes this is the right thing to do. I think the default should be not to fail on
warnings though as this is what checkstyle itself is configured to do and this
is also the default behavior of the maven 1.x plugin. I'll leave that up to you
to decide.
Thanks
> checsktyle:check seems to fail on warning too
> ---------------------------------------------
>
> Key: MCHECKSTYLE-38
> URL: http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MCHECKSTYLE-38
> Project: Maven 2.x Checkstyle Plugin
> Type: Bug
> Versions: 2.0
> Reporter: Vincent Massol
> Attachments: checkstyle-result.xml
>
>
> failOnViolation=true is supposed to fail only on errors but it seems to be
> failing on warnings too. See attached checkstyle result file which leads to
> {noformat}
> [...]
> [INFO] [checkstyle:check {execution: default}]
> [INFO]
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> [ERROR] BUILD FAILURE
> [INFO]
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> [INFO] You have 194 checkstyle violations.
> [INFO]
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> {noformat}
> I think the problem is that the code checks for an <error> tag whereas it
> should check for the "severity" attribute instead.
--
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
