-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 216
Spotless updates #331
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Merged
Merged
Spotless updates #331
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Can we do simply like
Run link checks
above and add theRun format checks
as a separate step ofquick-build
instead of creating a new job?There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Oh yeah, I didn't notice those were separate steps. I think it might be helpful to have the output separate though, since the build & tests & lint should be passing before approval, but format should be done after. It's easier (for me at least) to see that w/ fully separate tasks. And I don't know of any way to have multiple check results from the same job.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
But if your job fail, you can see pretty easily at which step the failure happened. I really see the format check as the same thing as the lint checks so I think we should replicate how it is done, at least for consistency? Also avoid preparing multiple times these containers makes the quick builder "quicker". Finally, since a
mvn install
is done in thequick-build
prior to the checks, it will allow us to validate the format of the generated files as well (which we want, right?)There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yeah, if you open the log and read through. I still think it's easier to see at a glance (i.e. in the emails it sends you, or from the PR list) if it's in a separate job, and they should run in parallel. The difference from the lint checks, imo, is that this is supposed to be done after approval, otherwise I'd make it part of the same job. And that's going to be tricky enough for new contributors (backing out format changes is often hard).
I haven't been formatting the generated code, it's not generated as complaint, so we'd need to essentially do a
spotless:apply
as part of generation. It would affect the protobuf stuff too. I can, but it didn't seem like something we really needed.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
That's true! Ok let's try it like this then