-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 8.8k
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
Enable Warnings Next Generation #5752
Conversation
e6c3acc
to
97ba6e1
Compare
sourceCodeEncoding: 'UTF-8', | ||
skipBlames: true, | ||
trendChartType: 'TOOLS_ONLY', | ||
qualityGates: [[threshold: 1, type: 'NEW', unstable: true]]]) |
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.
With that we could also enable spotbugs on medium and make it a lot harder that new issues get introduced.
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.
We could but how do you reproduce locally is it a matter of enabling medium and searching?
Not a huge fan of the approach but probably better to do so that new issues don’t creep in till we change the level
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.
Not a huge fan of the approach
I think you're seeing why I didn't go that far in this PR. :-) Yes, that is a more controversial change. I'm not a fan of using the CI system as a ratchet either: I'd rather use the build system for that. But I don't feel strongly either way. In any case that shouldn't matter for this PR, which preserves the status quo.
@@ -425,7 +425,6 @@ THE SOFTWARE. | |||
<!-- Version specified in parent POM --> | |||
<configuration> | |||
<consoleOutput>true</consoleOutput> | |||
<failsOnError>true</failsOnError> |
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.
This is for the Checkstyle plugin, right? Would be nice to retain this behavior for non-CI builds, e.g. via a default profile
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.
This is for the Checkstyle plugin, right?
Yes.
Would be nice to retain this behavior for non-CI builds
The existing behavior is retained for non-CI builds via <failOnViolation>
, which defaults to true. <failsOnError>
is unnecessary to retain the existing behavior.
Is it right that spotbugs reports no issues? |
Yes, it is. This is because we have |
We may merge it in 24 hours if there is no negative feedback. Please see the merge process documentation for more information about the merge process |
Fixes Javadoc warnings, then enables the Warnings Next Generation plugin as in jenkins-infra/pipeline-library#121. I tested this both with and without Checkstyle/SpotBugs/Javadoc violations locally and in CI.