chore: apply checkstyle again #1339

jeromevdl · 2023-08-03T13:24:11Z

Issue #, if available:

Description of changes:

Looks like the latest version of Intellij or the checkstyle plugin for intellij does not format the same way than before (when I pushed my checkstyle code I was on a previous version of IntelliJ).

And looks like some formatted code has been unformatted since I pushed (bad merges or something).

So I apply it again.

@scottgerring @mriccia @eldimi @kozub @msailes @AlexeySoshin, please make sure to have checkstyle plugin installed with the latest version of IntelliJ and apply it to your changes (not to the whole project). See contributing guide. When merging main into your branches, please make sure to apply the formatting changes too.

Checklist

Meet tenets criteria
Update tests
Update docs
PR title follows conventional commit semantics

Breaking change checklist

RFC issue #:

Migration process documented
Implement warnings (if it can live side by side)

By submitting this pull request, I confirm that you can use, modify, copy, and redistribute this contribution, under the terms of your choice.

codecov-commenter · 2023-08-03T13:27:14Z

Codecov Report

Patch coverage: 88.14% and project coverage change: -0.22% ⚠️

Comparison is base (fc3e971) 79.06% compared to head (7128036) 78.85%.

❗ Your organization is not using the GitHub App Integration. As a result you may experience degraded service beginning May 15th. Please install the Github App Integration for your organization. Read more.

Additional details and impacted files

@@             Coverage Diff              @@
##               main    #1339      +/-   ##
============================================
- Coverage     79.06%   78.85%   -0.22%     
  Complexity      651      651              
============================================
  Files            74       74              
  Lines          2489     2497       +8     
  Branches        257      257              
============================================
+ Hits           1968     1969       +1     
- Misses          441      448       +7     
  Partials         80       80

Files Changed	Coverage Δ
.../powertools/logging/internal/LambdaJsonLayout.java	`0.00% <0.00%> (ø)`
...ambda/powertools/parameters/AppConfigProvider.java	`85.48% <0.00%> (-1.41%)`	⬇️
.../lambda/powertools/parameters/SecretsProvider.java	`67.44% <0.00%> (-3.29%)`	⬇️
...mpotency/persistence/DynamoDBPersistenceStore.java	`89.24% <25.00%> (-1.21%)`	⬇️
...lambda/powertools/parameters/DynamoDbProvider.java	`80.32% <62.50%> (-2.73%)`	⬇️
...azon/lambda/powertools/parameters/SSMProvider.java	`90.00% <88.88%> (+0.29%)`	⬆️
...zon/lambda/powertools/parameters/BaseProvider.java	`97.91% <94.11%> (ø)`
...owertools/logging/internal/PowertoolsResolver.java	`94.73% <100.00%> (ø)`
...amazon/lambda/powertools/metrics/MetricsUtils.java	`91.30% <100.00%> (ø)`
...lambda/powertools/utilities/EventDeserializer.java	`99.10% <100.00%> (ø)`
... and 3 more

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

mriccia · 2023-08-03T15:08:58Z

LGTM. I ran Checkstyle on this branch, and there were no other changes triggered.
Let's make sure e2e-tests run before merging

scottgerring · 2023-08-03T18:12:48Z

Sonarqube reliability lint in examples - I have renamed the sonarqube config file on the batch branch so that we exclude examples from the copy-paste analysis. You might like to do the same here to get past the quality gate. The previous config file name was incorrect for the analysis mode we are using and had no effect.