No comment needed but I do not see a high value in enabling PT006/7, it
is a matter of personal preference (I tend to be more comfortable with using
` [("var1", expected2), ("var2", expected2)],` myself)


Thanks & Regards,
Amogh Desai


On Wed, Oct 15, 2025 at 6:13 AM Ferruzzi, Dennis <[email protected]>
wrote:

> RE: https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/40567
>
> Rule PT011 is in progress - thanks to contributor xchwan<
> https://github.com/xchwan> - which leaves only rules PT006 and PT007.
> Kaxil [1] and Ash [2] have both expressed a dislike for those two rules,
> perhaps others have as well, so I want to put it out there for lazy
> consensus.  I propose we drop those two from the project and mark it done
> once PT011 is completed.
>
> The "issue" in a nutshell:
>
> Enabling:
>
>
> PT006 | @pytest.mark.parametrize names should be a tuple
> PT007 | @pytest.mark.parametrize values should be a tuple
>
> would change:
>
>
> @pytest.mark.parametrize(
>     ("var, expected"),
>     [("var1", expected2), ("var2", expected2)],
> )
>
>
> to
>
>
> @pytest.mark.parametrize(
>     ("var", "expected"),
>     (("var1", expected2), ("var2", expected2)),
> )
>
> Specifically: the names would be enforced as a `tuple[str]` instead of
> `Iterable[str] | comma-delimited-str` and the values would be enforced as
> `tuple[Any]` instead of `Iterable[Any] `.
>
>
> The vote:
>
> If anyone feels strongly that these two remaining rules SHOULD be
> implemented, this is your chance.  If nobody makes an argument for enabling
> them, then consider lazy consensus met in 72 hours (Friday 17 Oct at 18:00
> Pacific Time) or when PT011 is finalized, whichever is longer.
>
> [1] https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/48114
> [2] https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/56395
>
>
>  - ferruzzi
>

Reply via email to