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

CLDR-17316 cldr-apps-webdriver Java formatting with spotless #41

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jan 30, 2024

Conversation

btangmu
Copy link
Member

@btangmu btangmu commented Jan 25, 2024

-Add toggleOffOn in pom.xml (the cldr project does not have that)

-Add spotless:on and spotless:off comments in SurveyDriverData.java, replacing prettier-ignore

-Other changes are only formatting results of running mvn spotless:apply

-Add toggleOffOn in pom.xml (the cldr project does not have that)

-Add spotless:on and spotless:off comments in SurveyDriverData.java, replacing prettier-ignore

-Other changes are only formatting results of running mvn spotless:apply
@btangmu btangmu self-assigned this Jan 25, 2024
@btangmu btangmu requested a review from srl295 January 25, 2024 21:59
@@ -58,6 +58,7 @@
<ratchetFrom>NONE</ratchetFrom>
<!-- define a language-specific format -->
<java>
<toggleOffOn />
Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@srl295 I'm a little surprised that cldr didn't need this, which enables spotless:on/off comments for disabling formatting of a few long arrays... probably those arrays should be implemented differently anyway but I think this is better than one item per line...

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

CLDR probably needs this but didn't know about it. we just let spotless do what it wants to do. want to file an issue and/or put on the infra agenda?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I'll put it on the agenda. I don't remember any specific instances of anyone being unhappy with the spotless results. I just vaguely recall such issues when various formatting options were being considered.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

anyway is this PR okay?

@btangmu btangmu merged commit 766e93c into unicode-org:main Jan 30, 2024
2 checks passed
@btangmu btangmu deleted the t17316_c branch January 30, 2024 19:38
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.

2 participants