PARQUET-2386: More consistent code style in parquet-mr

[amousavigourabi]

Make sure you have checked all steps below.

Jira

• My PR addresses the following Parquet Jira issues and references them in the PR title. For example, "PARQUET-1234: My Parquet PR"
  • https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PARQUET-XXX
  • In case you are adding a dependency, check if the license complies with the ASF 3rd Party License Policy.

Tests

• My PR adds the following unit tests OR does not need testing for this extremely good reason:
  • This PR only refactors style, no logic is added or removed in any way shape or form

Commits

• My commits all reference Jira issues in their subject lines. In addition, my commits follow the guidelines from "How to write a good git commit message":
  1. Subject is separated from body by a blank line
  2. Subject is limited to 50 characters (not including Jira issue reference)
  3. Subject does not end with a period
  4. Subject uses the imperative mood ("add", not "adding")
  5. Body wraps at 72 characters
  6. Body explains "what" and "why", not "how"

Documentation

• In case of new functionality, my PR adds documentation that describes how to use it.
  • All the public functions and the classes in the PR contain Javadoc that explain what it does
  • Adds note in the PR template on the style checks

---

This PR contains two commits, the first adds the style checks and configurations, the second applies these changes to the repository.

[amousavigourabi]

@wgtmac

[amousavigourabi]

The .editorconfig has been expanded for IntelliJ and is mostly compliant with the Spotless configuration. IntelliJ refactoring and Spotless have some minor disagreements on continuation indents sometimes, which cannot really be resolved at the moment. As it is included in the Maven lifecycle, the Spotless configuration would of course be leading.

[wgtmac]

Thanks for the improvement!

Could you please take a look at this? @shangxinli @gszadovszky @Fokko

[gszadovszky]

Thank you @amousavigourabi for working on this!
One comment about tabs for indention, otherwise LGTM.

[gszadovszky]

Does it mean we allow tabs for indention? (Personally, I don't like tabs because it might be rendered differently on different systems.)

[amousavigourabi]

No, tabs are not allowed by this configuration. This block is a way to make the linter work as it should with two space indents as used by Parquet, instead of four.

[amousavigourabi]

It is a bit hacky, but it also allows contributors to run the spotless:apply goal in case they are for whatever reason using tabs in their development environment.

[Fokko]

This is great @amousavigourabi. I was thinking of adding linting as well, so great work here!

[amousavigourabi]

@Fokko , how do we want to coordinate this pull request and your refactoring PRs? I do not feel a lot for applying the editorconfig and Spotless a dozen or so times to resolve conflicts in this PR after each of those get merged.

[Fokko]

@amousavigourabi I can see that it is not nice having to rebase all the time. I can hold off on mine, they are probably easier to resolve than yours.

[amousavigourabi]

I rebased on the latest master. I'd rather get this merged somewhat quickly (maybe by the end of the week?) as to avoid blocking other merges and/or endless rebasing.

[wgtmac]

I rebased on the latest master. I'd rather get this merged somewhat quickly (maybe by the end of the week?) as to avoid blocking other merges and/or endless rebasing.

I just merged this PR to unblock others. Thanks @amousavigourabi!