Resolutons

+ + + + + + + +

Resolution 001 - Minimal Coding Standards

+
+ +

+ + + + + + + +

Majority Position

+
+ +

+ As the POI project has grown the "styles" used have become more + varied, some see this as a bad thing, but in reality it + can be a good thing. Each can learn from the different + styles by working with different code. That being said + there are some universal "good quality" guidelines that + must be adopted on a project of any proportions. +

+ +

+ Marc Johnson Authored the following resolution: +

+ +

+ On Tue, 2002-01-08 at 22:23, Marc Johnson wrote: + Standards are wonderful; everyone should have a set. + Here's what I propose for coding standards for POI WRT comments (should I + feel the need, I'll post more of these little gems): +

+ +

+ All classes and interfaces MUST have, right at the beginning, the POI + License (see poi/doc/LICENSE). +
+ All classes and interfaces MUST include class javadoc. Conventionally, + this goes after the package and imports, and before the start of the class + or interface. The class javadoc MUST have at least one @author tag +
+ All methods that are accessible outside the class MUST have javadoc + comments. In other words, if it isn't private, it MUST have javadoc + comments. Simple getters can consist of a simple @return tag; simple setters + can consist of a simple @param tag. Anything else requires some verbiage + plus all the standard javadoc tags as appropriate. You MUST include @throws + or @exception for any non-runtime exceptions, and you SHOULD document any + runtime exceptions you expect to throw. @throws/@exception tags SHOULD + include an explanation of why that exception would be thrown. If your method + might return null, you MUST say so. An accompanying explanation of the + circumstances for doing so would be nice. +

+ +

+
+ +

+ + + + + + + +

Amendments (informal by extension and not by vote)

+
+ +

+ As opposed to the formerly used POI License which was + based on the Apache Public License, now that POI is part of + Jakarta, use the APL 1.1 for the header. Currently, the + Apache Software Foundation requires us to use the full + long version. +

+ +

+
+ +

+ + + + + + + +

Dissent

+
+ +

+ The motion was passed unanimously with no negative or + positive votes. +

+ +

+
+ +

+ + + + + + + +

Comments

+
+ +

+ Andy didn't feel like going through his mail and sucking + out the comments.. If there is anything you feel should + be added here do it yourself ;-). +

+ +

+
+ +