Fixing Sonar issues?

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
4 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Fixing Sonar issues?

Yasser Zamani-2
It seems we have 259 new code smells raised [1] somehow they're much :(
what's your idea about what we should do?

I have similar doubt about coverage. It seems it's 46%. I thought that
we should find most important ones at [2] and fix them everyday one by
one on a daily basis. What's your idea?

Are they (and other old ones) in priority to spend energy and time to
fix? I was in doubt because they're a huge work and if you @dev prefer
spend time to fixing them.

Regards,
Yasser.


[1]
https://builds.apache.org/analysis/component_issues/index?id=org.apache.struts%3Astruts2-parent#resolved=false|createdAfter=2017-11-01T03%3A30%3A00%2B0330
[2] https://coveralls.io/github/apache/struts

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Fixing Sonar issues?

Lukasz Lenart
2017-11-28 16:22 GMT+01:00 Yasser Zamani <[hidden email]>:

> It seems we have 259 new code smells raised [1] somehow they're much :(
> what's your idea about what we should do?
>
> I have similar doubt about coverage. It seems it's 46%. I thought that
> we should find most important ones at [2] and fix them everyday one by
> one on a daily basis. What's your idea?
>
> Are they (and other old ones) in priority to spend energy and time to
> fix? I was in doubt because they're a huge work and if you @dev prefer
> spend time to fixing them.

I would focus on the most important things and resolve them when there
is a time to do it. We should constantly eliminate those problems but
it isn't a top priority.


Regards
--
Łukasz
+ 48 606 323 122 http://www.lenart.org.pl/

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Fixing Sonar issues?

Stefaan Dutry-2
> It seems we have 259 new code smells raised [1] somehow they're much :(
> what's your idea about what we should do?
>
> I have similar doubt about coverage. It seems it's 46%. I thought that
> we should find most important ones at [2] and fix them everyday one by
> one on a daily basis. What's your idea?
>
> Are they (and other old ones) in priority to spend energy and time to
> fix? I was in doubt because they're a huge work and if you @dev prefer
> spend time to fixing them.

Talking from my personal experience, you should not just blindly
eliminate all Issues reported by a code analyzer.
(I've done that for a single project at our work and i've regretted it
ever since)

My advise would be to start with the things:
-) that are in the section of a file you're working on
-) that seem logical
-) that don't decrease readability
-) that don't increases complexity (interpreted by humans, not a code analyzer).

And when fixing one:
-) use a seperate commit
-) with a clear message

Regards,
Stefaan Dutry (sdutry)

2017-12-01 14:57 GMT+01:00 Lukasz Lenart <[hidden email]>:

> 2017-11-28 16:22 GMT+01:00 Yasser Zamani <[hidden email]>:
>> It seems we have 259 new code smells raised [1] somehow they're much :(
>> what's your idea about what we should do?
>>
>> I have similar doubt about coverage. It seems it's 46%. I thought that
>> we should find most important ones at [2] and fix them everyday one by
>> one on a daily basis. What's your idea?
>>
>> Are they (and other old ones) in priority to spend energy and time to
>> fix? I was in doubt because they're a huge work and if you @dev prefer
>> spend time to fixing them.
>
> I would focus on the most important things and resolve them when there
> is a time to do it. We should constantly eliminate those problems but
> it isn't a top priority.
>
>
> Regards
> --
> Łukasz
> + 48 606 323 122 http://www.lenart.org.pl/
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Fixing Sonar issues?

Yasser Zamani-2


On 12/4/2017 8:58 PM, Stefaan Dutry wrote:

> Talking from my personal experience, you should not just blindly
> eliminate all Issues reported by a code analyzer.
> (I've done that for a single project at our work and i've regretted it
> ever since)
>
> My advise would be to start with the things:
> -) that are in the section of a file you're working on
> -) that seem logical
> -) that don't decrease readability
> -) that don't increases complexity (interpreted by humans, not a code analyzer).
>
> And when fixing one:
> -) use a seperate commit
> -) with a clear message

Thanks! Yes I agree. Specially with "that are in the section of a file
you're working on". As you may saw, I disused Sonar's GitHub plugin
which can analyze PRs and would help a lot to avoid making things worse.

I also will work if `coverall` can warn on PRs if a changed or added
file has coverage less than e.g. 85%. This helps a lot both Pull
Requester and Reviewers. Pull Requester will know tests should be added.
Reviewer will know this PR should be reviewed more carefully.

Thanks for your attention,
Yasser.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]