<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!--
   ====================================================================
   Licensed to the Apache Software Foundation (ASF) under one or more
   contributor license agreements.  See the NOTICE file distributed with
   this work for additional information regarding copyright ownership.
   The ASF licenses this file to You under the Apache License, Version 2.0
   (the "License"); you may not use this file except in compliance with
   the License.  You may obtain a copy of the License at

       http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0

   Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing, software
   distributed under the License is distributed on an "AS IS" BASIS,
   WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, either express or implied.
   See the License for the specific language governing permissions and
   limitations under the License.
   ====================================================================
-->
<!DOCTYPE document PUBLIC "-//APACHE//DTD Documentation V1.1//EN" "../dtd/document-v11.dtd">

<document>
 <header>
  <title>POI Resoluton</title>
  <subtitle>Resolution 001 - Minimal Coding Standards</subtitle>
  <authors>
   <person name="Andrew C. Oliver" email="acoliver@apache.org"/>
  </authors>
 </header>

 <body>
 <section><title>Resolution 001 - Minimal Coding Standards</title>
   <section><title>Majority Position</title>
     <p>
       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.
     </p>
     <p>
       Marc Johnson Authored the following resolution:
     </p>
     <p>
       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):
     </p>
     <ol>
       <li>
         All classes and interfaces MUST have, right at the 
         beginning of the file, the Apache Software License
         2.0 License Header. (see /legal/LICENSE).
       </li>
       <li>
         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. 
         <!-- No more author tags -->
         <!-- The class javadoc MUST have at least one @author tag -->
       </li>
       <li>
         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.
       </li>
     </ol>
   </section>
        <section><title>Amendments (informal by extension and not by vote)</title>
            <section><title>License</title>
                <p>
                        As opposed to the formerly used POI License (which was
                        based on the Apache Public License), now that POI is 
                        part of Apache, use the standard Apache Software
                        License 2.0 header.  As per standard Apache Software 
                        Foundation policy, the full (long) version of the
                        header should be used.
                </p>
            </section>
            <section><title>2 cents</title>
                 <p>
                       Tip:  No laughing or joking allowed in conversations regarding coding
                       standards.
                       Any mail on coding standards will be treated very seriously,
                       and sent here with a RTFM.
                </p>
            </section>
        </section>
        <section><title>Dissent</title>
                <p>
                        The motion was passed unanimously with no negative or
                        neutral votes.
                </p>
        </section>
        <section><title>Comments</title>
                <p>
                        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 ;-).
                </p>
        </section>
  </section>
 </body>
</document>
