Closed bmarwell closed 2 years ago
rebased and force-pushed. Do you want to see another PR where I apply the linting rules?
rebased and force-pushed. Do you want to see another PR where I apply the linting rules?
No, thank you. @georgberky and me have to discuss which kind of rules we want to. But thanks for pushing this topic.
No, thank you. @georgberky and me have to discuss which kind of rules we want to. But thanks for pushing this topic.
By creating this PR and offering to create a fix, I was hoping to became part of the discussion. Thanks for the exclusion then, I guess?? 😢
Hi, @bmarwell , thanks for this PR. I'll have a look, also check the Maven Plugin and see what I think about the base ruleset. I do not want to invest too much time into ktlint while the project is still small, but I'll give it a shot.
My current way of thinking is that I do want properly formatted Kotlin code. If ktlint can help us with that better than Editorconfig and without having to put too much time into it. I'd love to use ktlint. The rules they have on their homepage look great already.
I do not want to invest too much time into ktlint while the project is still small, but I'll give it a shot.
That's the perfect time - not much reformatting needed. Later versions will inherit more clutter by reformatting commits.
If ktlint can help us with that better than Editorconfig and without having to put too much time into it.
yup. Big +1. the formatter would make a nice pre-commit hook which works everywhere.
@bmarwell, let's give ktlint a shot. Could you please check out if gantsign/ktlint-maven-plugin works equally well as using antrun? If possible I don't want to break out of the Maven universe.
I think ktlint:check
looks like the goal we want to use. Also binding it to the verify
phase looks ok to me after I've read
run any checks to verify the package is valid and meets quality criteria
here.
If you agree, please use the plugin and let ktlint:check
run in its default phase, verify
.
superseeded by #65
fixes #11