-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 131
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
Issue #529: Deprecate launch.groovy and merge functionality into diff.groovy #546
Merged
Merged
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 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 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 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
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
@@ -1,3 +1,5 @@ | ||
# _LAUNCH.GROOVY IS BEING DEPRECATED!!!_ | ||
|
||
# launch.groovy | ||
|
||
Checkstyle report generation | ||
|
This file contains 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
Oops, something went wrong.
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
The way i understand this, you run regression using Contribution Master and Contribution PR and check if the 2 separate runs produce the same or different files. I assume difference will fail the CI (and are we sure of that?).
If the above is correct, is this planned to be merged in? What happens if we make diff-report-util change the layout. This will then always fail CI even though it is an expected change.
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.
Yes. https://travis-ci.org/github/checkstyle/contribution/jobs/763804426
I would guess at that point we would need to use some sort of more complicated awk or perl command to verify that violations match up; right now, this CI job confirms that both the violations and format of the report are consistent.
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.
I wouldn't do anything too complicated. Should we not merge it or is there some alternative for this to not cause issues easily?
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.
I think we should keep these, I have pushed several times in this PR, and these jobs haven't been flaky. It is the best way that I can think of to easily check that the violations, reports, and report formats are all consistent.
I think it is ok to wait and see what the future brings regarding changes to
patch-diff-util
before doing anything different here.