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

style: Preparing for upcoming Checkstyle release 8.28 #1654

Merged
merged 1 commit into from Dec 19, 2019

Conversation

gmshake
Copy link
Contributor

@gmshake gmshake commented Dec 19, 2019

All Submissions:

  • Have you followed the guidelines in our Contributing document?
  • Have you checked to ensure there aren't other open Pull Requests for the same update/change?

New Feature Submissions:

  1. Does your submission pass tests?
  2. Does mvn checkstyle:check pass ?
  3. Have you added your new test classes to an existing test suite in alphabetical order?

Changes to Existing Features:

  • Does this break existing behaviour? If so please explain.
  • Have you added an explanation of what your changes do and why you'd like us to include them?
  • Have you written new tests for your core changes, as applicable?
  • Have you successfully run tests with your changes locally?

Related issue: #1652

@codecov-io
Copy link

@codecov-io codecov-io commented Dec 19, 2019

Codecov Report

Merging #1654 into master will increase coverage by 0.96%.
The diff coverage is n/a.

@@             Coverage Diff              @@
##             master    #1654      +/-   ##
============================================
+ Coverage     67.85%   68.82%   +0.96%     
- Complexity     4042     4088      +46     
============================================
  Files           181      181              
  Lines         16945    16957      +12     
  Branches       2774     2789      +15     
============================================
+ Hits          11498    11670     +172     
+ Misses         4175     4010     -165     
- Partials       1272     1277       +5

@romani
Copy link
Contributor

@romani romani commented Dec 19, 2019

@gmshake , please answer questions that are in issue template.

Travis failure looks like unrelated to your change.

@gmshake gmshake force-pushed the feature/migrate_checkstyle_7119 branch from b19f505 to bb30c7e Compare Dec 19, 2019
@gmshake gmshake changed the title Preparing for upcoming Checkstyle release 8.28 style: Preparing for upcoming Checkstyle release 8.28 Dec 19, 2019
@gmshake
Copy link
Contributor Author

@gmshake gmshake commented Dec 19, 2019

It's weird that code style affects coverage.

@gmshake
Copy link
Contributor Author

@gmshake gmshake commented Dec 19, 2019

@gmshake , please answer questions that are in issue template.

@romani Done!

@vlsi
Copy link
Member

@vlsi vlsi commented Dec 19, 2019

This looks good to me.

@gmshake , do you expect more changes or should this be merged?

@romani
Copy link
Contributor

@romani romani commented Dec 19, 2019

this is all that we need.
as this PR merged we will switch chekcstyle's CI back to HEAD master of pgjdbc repo.

@gmshake
Copy link
Contributor Author

@gmshake gmshake commented Dec 19, 2019

@vlsi
No more changes right now. But since Checkstyle 8.28 has not been released yet, all PRs about to be merged should be checked carefully against the style as you mentioned in #1652 (comment)

I think the idea was as follows:

all static imports
---
org.postgresql.**
---
all other
---
java.**
---
javax.**

@vlsi vlsi merged commit 0b60c62 into pgjdbc:master Dec 19, 2019
1 of 2 checks passed
@romani
Copy link
Contributor

@romani romani commented Dec 19, 2019

if any additional changes become required (caused by changes in pgjdbc repo) we will provide PR with fixes after release of checkstyle.

I still highly recommend to use single stable version of checkstyle in pom, to have the same behavior on each contributor locals and in CI.

@vlsi
Copy link
Member

@vlsi vlsi commented Dec 19, 2019

Indeed. I've switched to 8.27 in d164cba

davecramer pushed 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
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

4 participants