Replies: 2 comments 1 reply
-
|
I am all in on this @slandelle ❤️ |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
0 replies
-
|
So basically you can always run a command locally to format things instead of waiting for CI to tell you what's been incorrectly formatted? I often run a no-test build locally for checkstyle purpose, so this would be similar except it does the reformatting for me. I'm not against it. Reformatting the three branches will be annoying, but we're only doing that once. If IDEs can pick up the spotless formatting settings automatically, that would be a big benefit. Not clear if that's possible, though. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
1 reply
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
-
Netty currently relies on checkstyle rules.
This is pretty cumbersome for contributors:
Nowadays, the most standard practice is to plug code formatting on the build tool. This alleviate the need to configure anything custom in the IDE.
In Java+maven the most standard solution is spotless. Every Java project is basically moving away from checkstyle and adopting spotless instead.
It's been a bliss using it at Gatling, eg https://github.com/gatling/gatling-maven-plugin/blob/main/pom.xml#L162-L192
process-resourcesphaseverifyphase, so CI would failRegarding the code format to be adopted, spotless supports several of them.
IMHO, we should picking the default one, with no tuning, even if it doesn't match the current one. The point of code format conventions is to save time and headaches on endless and pointless personal preferences.
The code formatting would have to be applied on all 3 active branches to ease backporting.
WDYT?
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions