Skip to content
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

fix: improper indentation for javadoc #1434

merged 1 commit into from Mar 15, 2019

fix: improper indentation for javadoc #1434

merged 1 commit into from Mar 15, 2019


Copy link

@rnveach rnveach commented Mar 11, 2019

This PR is being created because of violations found in CheckStyle's regression of Orekit during implementation of a bug fix.
PR: checkstyle/checkstyle#6529
Issue: checkstyle/checkstyle#6516

A bug was found in identifying javadocs where certain type of javadocs were missed from validation. The change produced new violations in Orekit as seen below:

[INFO] --- maven-checkstyle-plugin:3.0.0:check (default-cli) @ postgresql ---
[INFO] Starting audit...
[ERROR] /pipeline/source/.ci-temp/pgjdbc/pgjdbc/src/main/java/org/postgresql/copy/ Line continuation have incorrect indentation level, expected level should be 4. [JavadocTagContinuationIndentation]
Audit done.

You can either accept this PR and not have an issue when you upgrade CS with this fix in the future,
or make your own change/fix later when you do upgrade CS.
Please let us know which way you intend to go.

Feel free to ask any questions.

Copy link

@AppVeyorBot AppVeyorBot commented Mar 11, 2019

Copy link

@codecov-io codecov-io commented Mar 11, 2019

Codecov Report

Merging #1434 into master will not change coverage.
The diff coverage is n/a.

@@            Coverage Diff            @@
##             master    #1434   +/-   ##
  Coverage     68.74%   68.74%           
  Complexity     3902     3902           
  Files           179      179           
  Lines         16414    16414           
  Branches       2672     2672           
  Hits          11284    11284           
  Misses         3882     3882           
  Partials       1248     1248

Copy link

@romani romani commented Mar 15, 2019

@AlexElin , @davecramer , sorry to bother you personally, please take a look at this PR with minor fix.
It will allow us to continue to use pgjdbc in checkstyle CI and guaranty that pgjdbc will not have regression during checkstyle version upgrade.

@vlsi vlsi merged commit 35df0dd into pgjdbc:master Mar 15, 2019
3 checks passed
@rnveach rnveach deleted the cs_issue_6516 branch Mar 15, 2019
davecramer added a commit to davecramer/pgjdbc that referenced this issue Jul 5, 2021
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
None yet
None yet
Linked issues

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

5 participants