+1
I have some concerns about all of the different ways we configure geode to
be secure, but that's a different issue ;-)
Overall, very thorough proposal Juan!
On Mon, Jun 24, 2019 at 4:22 PM Dan Smith wrote:
> +1
>
> This proposal looks good to me!
>
> On Mon, Jun 24, 2019 at 4:15 PM Udo Koh
I like the idea of a recommended reading list for Geode contributors.
My concerns around adopting broad standards and guidelines that can’t be
automatically checked & applied are twofold:
a) what is the policy regarding existing code? Is every PR going forward
expected to bring every file it
+1
This proposal looks good to me!
On Mon, Jun 24, 2019 at 4:15 PM Udo Kohlmeyer wrote:
> +1, Count me in
>
> On 6/24/19 13:06, Juan José Ramos wrote:
> > Hey Jake,
> >
> > Sure, I guess we could do a live session if there's enough interest after
> > people have reviewed the proposal.
> > Best
+1, Count me in
On 6/24/19 13:06, Juan José Ramos wrote:
Hey Jake,
Sure, I guess we could do a live session if there's enough interest after
people have reviewed the proposal.
Best regards.
On Mon, Jun 24, 2019 at 4:17 PM Jacob Barrett wrote:
On Jun 24, 2019, at 11:49 AM, Juan José Ramos
Just to *wrap up* this thread: *I'm with-drawing my proposal.*
We do not have any sort of consensus (rough or otherwise) regarding the use
of final on local variables.
Thanks to everyone who participated!
On Thu, Jun 13, 2019 at 1:31 PM Kirk Lund wrote:
> According to Effective Java 3rd Editio
>
> Just to make sure I got this 100% right, you mean the work related as part
> of the proposal would be under development, correct?
Yes! And I like your suggestion to just create a couple of buckets on the
wiki, rather than one for each state.
-Dan
On Mon, Jun 24, 2019 at 3:37 PM Alexander Mu
> it might be nice to have separate subdirectories on the wiki for the
different proposal states, to easily see what state the proposals are in.
I think that's useful. I wonder if it would make sense though to bucket
some of these. Maybe we could make do with just a "current" and "old"
directory.
Maybe we need a "recommended reading" list more than we need a
non-enforceable standard. The Oracle wiki has a lot of good
correct/incorrect examples that people could learn from if they take the
time to read through it all.
On 6/24/19 3:15 PM, Kirk Lund wrote:
Java is complicated and Apach
> Is there an entry in the Coding Standard's Rules section that you feel is
irrelevant or incorrect? Please pick an example with a link to it so we can
discuss it.
I haven't seen any rules in there that I think are irrelevant or incorrect.
My reasoning is a little different from that:
I think ther
+1
Looks good to me!
A couple of minor thoughts - it might be nice to have separate
subdirectories on the wiki for the different proposal states, to easily see
what state the proposals are in.
One thing that isn't visible in these states - is the proposal actively
under development? It might be
Java is complicated and Apache Geode is complicated, hence it's a large
Coding Standard. *Effective Java* is similarly *large* if you compare it to
the *Google Java Style Guide*.
The "*rules*" are "*guidelines*" -- I think you're being too literal. Also,
please remember what I said:
I'm not propo
>
> What did you like about the SEI rules you suggested? I’m wondering why
> _that_ one versus all the others in the universe?
For me, the book The CERT Oracle Secure Coding Standard for Java is almost
as essential as Effective Java in my library of Java books. As far I know,
there are no other
Hi Kirk,
I think having a coding standard that goes beyond a formatting style guide
is a great idea. There are many interesting things in the SEI CERT
standard. However, it's also massive. I see 13 rules just about methods.
Yet some guidelines that would be most important to me like limiting metho
What did you like about the SEI rules you suggested? I’m wondering why _that_
one versus all the others in the universe?
Anthony
> On Jun 24, 2019, at 2:15 PM, Kirk Lund wrote:
>
> Apache Geode has a Code Style Guide [1] which is currently defined as
> following the Google Java Style Guide [
Having the RFC discussion in a pull request was by far the most
controversial aspect of this proposal. Because we were unable to come to an
agreement, we should stick with the smallest change to what we are doing
already. Therefore I moved the proposal to the wiki where all existing
proposals are.
Apache Geode has a Code Style Guide [1] which is currently defined as
following the Google Java Style Guide [2]. This style guide is a good
starting point, but it deals primarily with formatting of code and is a
fairly dated and static document that doesn't evolve much.
I'd like to propose that th
Hey Jake,
Sure, I guess we could do a live session if there's enough interest after
people have reviewed the proposal.
Best regards.
On Mon, Jun 24, 2019 at 4:17 PM Jacob Barrett wrote:
>
>
> > On Jun 24, 2019, at 11:49 AM, Juan José Ramos wrote:
> >
> > I’d rather get feedback in any way and
> On Jun 24, 2019, at 11:49 AM, Juan José Ramos wrote:
>
> I’d rather get feedback in any way and aggregate everything on my own than
> maybe not getting anything because I'm explicitly limiting the options to
> provide it.
Dealers choice so both it is!
Could you also consider public live s
Hey Jake,
It makes sense.
I personally prefer to gather feedback through the Wiki to keep everything
in one single place, *but* I've explicitly mentioned the two options as
acceptable because this particular proposal already got feedback through
both communication channels *and* we haven't settled
> On Jun 24, 2019, at 11:35 AM, Juan José Ramos wrote:
>
> Please take some time to review it thoroughly, adding comments and/or
> concerns either to the *Wiki page [1]* or this email thread directly, all
> feedback is more than welcome.
Let’s try to keep the conversation in one medium or the o
Hello all,
I've update the *Proposal [1]* incorporating the feedback provided.
Please take some time to review it thoroughly, adding comments and/or
concerns either to the *Wiki page [1]* or this email thread directly, all
feedback is more than welcome.
I'll reach out again in one week time with a
21 matches
Mail list logo
