I am a member of the GreenCodeInitiative core team, we recently added the ecoCode Javascript plugin to the SonarQube Marketplace and now we would like to add our ecoCode Android plugin.
The ecoCode Android plugin follows the same principles as other ecoCode plugins ( see: [NEW PLUGIN] ecoCode - Requesting inclusion in SonarQube Marketplace ) but for Android projects.
It adds ecoCode rules for Java, XML and Groovy specific for Android.The first release we would like to include is 1.1.0.
As you’re aware, we (I) need to test, but I’m not sure yet when I’ll get to it. If you don’t hear from me soon, that doesn’t mean I’m ignoring or overlooking you.
Thanks for your patience. The bureaucratic requirements look good. And so does the testing. I’ll process the pull request. Congrats on a smooth entry into the Marketplace.
And here are the things I saw in testing that you might consider for the next release:
For some rules, the message and description are the same. This is unfortunate. For instance, I don’t understand “too heavy to handle all cases” from the message and the description doesn’t help me.
The titles and descriptions of ecocode-android-java:EC505 and ecocode-android-java:EC506 appear to be identical (except for a detail in the code sample). I see they raise different numbers of issues, so I suppose the implementations are distinct. You should consider either differentiating them or perhaps combining them.
I like the polar bears that show up in some of the rule descriptions. Particularly the one with the eyebrow.
That said, face vs severity seems… somewhat random?
That’s a good news! Thanks for your returns. I read your comments and I agree with you. I will enter issues on our project to fix them in the next release.
For some rules, the message and description are the same → indeed, we read again our rules as a whole and update their description if necessary (some of them have 2 years now)
Merge rules EC505 and 506 → you are right
Glad you like Ekko our polar bear ! It was a little joke at the beginning to identify our rules so yes it was “random”. Now, I think we will definitively adopt it and match the image with the severity. I have 4 images and since we do not have critical issues for the moment, we will update the rules like that :
! It was a little joke at the beginning to identify our rules so yes it was “random”. Now, I think we will definitively adopt it and match the image with the severity. I have 4 images and since we do not have critical issues for the moment, we will update the rules like that :