-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 41
Reactivate Checkstyle #3539
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
base: main
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Reactivate Checkstyle #3539
Conversation
|
This pull request sets up GitHub code scanning for this repository. Once the scans have completed and the checks have passed, the analysis results for this pull request branch will appear on this overview. Once you merge this pull request, the 'Security' tab will show more code scanning analysis results (for example, for the default branch). Depending on your configuration and choice of analysis tool, future pull requests will be annotated with code scanning analysis results. For more information about GitHub code scanning, check out the documentation. |
9a1b5bd to
9d5b60b
Compare
|
Missing check, if no Java files were altered. |
If there is confusion, should that not be cleared first? What is the confusion about? |
This was just an euphemism for we agreed on Sonarcube, set up the rules, and someone deactivates it. This leads to questions. |
mattulbrich
left a comment
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 newly introduced check still fails.
Regarding tools like SonarCube:
CodeQuality measuring gates help improve the code. However, they must work properly. If they fail consistently and are not repaired, they should be turned off.
a430484 to
a827455
Compare
1947eb5 to
a827455
Compare
57e97bd to
9c777af
Compare
238f19a to
0b6cabb
Compare
Codecov Report✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests. Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #3539 +/- ##
============================================
- Coverage 47.99% 47.98% -0.01%
+ Complexity 16046 16042 -4
============================================
Files 1683 1683
Lines 96044 96044
Branches 15387 15387
============================================
- Hits 46093 46087 -6
- Misses 44681 44686 +5
- Partials 5270 5271 +1 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. 🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
|
0b6cabb to
130ec83
Compare
99932e8 to
3655546
Compare
391eaf1 to
6e172c4
Compare
Reporting is done via job summary, sarif upload, and build artifact.
- translation of junit into annotation is now done in Gradle - update wrapper to 9.1.0 for Java 25 support - rebase on main - put checkstyle markdown report into separate file
a5358af to
124e908
Compare
Someone deactivated Sonarqube. We seem to have a deeper inner confusion with our common understanding of clean code. This is my last attempt at getting something going, after this I am on my wit's end.
First, this PR reactivates the Checkstyle using updated versions of the
GitDiffFilter, which are now externalized as Maven dependencies. The code of the diff filter are here: https://github.com/wadoon/checkstyle-key-extensions. Ownership transferred on acceptance, also published on Maven Central.The address of the diff is
checkstyle("org.key-project.devel:checkstyle-key-extensions:1.17-SNAPSHOT")which can then be used across projects. The
checkstyle-key-extensionsare updated to the latest version of checkstyle, which has two filters now: one for files before parsing, one for issues after linting.checkstyle-key-extensionsuses both.Checkstyle is invoked via Gradle via
checkstyleMainandcheckstyleTest. Dependencies are managed by Gradle.The bottleneck is the limited reported possibilities on Github. This PR tries to use everything.
A Markdown Job summary is added

Sarif files are joined and uploaded:

HTML checkstyle artifacts can be downloaded

Moreover, it simplifies the Jacoco integration.
At the end of the Github tests runs, a Gradle task reads JUnit test xml reports and prints out Github annotations. Failing tests should appear on the Github workflow summary.
It does not add a comment to the PR as this is not reliable due to reduced permissions on workflow executions for foreign repositories.
Testing
Testing of this PR is hard. You need
It might be a good choice to merge this branch squashily on some of your working branches for testing.