+1 for replacing it with travis linting.

On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 7:59 PM, Jeremiah Lowin <[email protected]> wrote:

> FWIW I recently started using yapf (https://github.com/google/yapf) with a
> slightly custom config to format all of my projects. Rather than alert to
> discrete linting errors and concrete style rules (like PEP8) -- things I'm
> sure we all do anyway -- it reformats all code in compliance with your
> chosen style rules. It even reformats code that is already PEP8 compliant
> to make it more "pythonic" (and still PEP8 compliant). Basically: if you
> like (or create) a yapf style, it takes care of all the hard reformatting
> work and produces pleasing, consistent results. /plug
>
> On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 8:42 PM Maxime Beauchemin <
> [email protected]> wrote:
>
> > Let's wire a custom a linter command that can be called locally and
> respect
> > an agreed upon set of parameters (pylint + config file, based off of our
> > current .landscape.yml ).
> >
> > flake8 is far from being as good as pylint and can't be customized much
> > AFAICT, but variations on the command bellow can help you lint [only]
> your
> > PR:
> >
> > `git diff HEAD^ | flake8 --diff`
> >
> > It's a good thing to integrate in your workflow until we get an
> equivalent
> > pylint command/config
> >
> > On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 5:03 PM, Alex Guziel <[email protected]
> > .invalid
> > > wrote:
> >
> > > +1 also
> > >
> > > We have code review already and the amount of false positives makes
> this
> > > useless.
> > >
> > > On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 5:02 PM, Maxime Beauchemin <
> > > [email protected]> wrote:
> > >
> > > > +1 as well
> > > >
> > > > I'm disappointed because the service is inches away from getting
> > > everything
> > > > right. As Bolke said, behind the cover it's little more than pylint,
> > git
> > > > hooks, and a somewhat-fancy ui.
> > > >
> > > > Operationally it's been getting in the way.
> > > >
> > > > There's a way to pipe the output of git diff into pylint and check
> > > whether
> > > > the touched lines need linting, in which case we should break the
> > build.
> > > > This could run in it's own slot in the Travis build matrix.
> > > >
> > > > Max
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 4:51 PM, Bolke de Bruin <[email protected]>
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > We can do it in Travis’ afaik. We should replace it.
> > > > >
> > > > > So +1.
> > > > >
> > > > > B.
> > > > >
> > > > > > On 16 Mar 2017, at 16:48, Jeremiah Lowin <[email protected]>
> > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > This may be an unpopular opinion, but most Airflow PRs have a
> > little
> > > > red
> > > > > > "x" next to them not because they have failing unit tests, but
> > > because
> > > > > the
> > > > > > Landscape check has decided they introduce bad code.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Unfortunately Landscape is often wrong -- here it is telling me
> my
> > > > latest
> > > > > > PR introduced no less than 30 errors... in files I didn't touch!
> > > > > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-airflow/pull/2157 (however,
> it
> > > > > gives me
> > > > > > credit for fixing 23 errors in those same files, so I've got that
> > > going
> > > > > for
> > > > > > me... which is nice.)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The upshot is that Github's "health" indicator can be swayed by
> > minor
> > > > or
> > > > > > erroneous issues, and therefore it serves little purpose other
> than
> > > > > making
> > > > > > it look like every PR is bad. This creates committer fatigue,
> since
> > > > every
> > > > > > PR needs to be parsed to see if it actually is OK or not.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Don't get me wrong, I'm all for proper style and on occasion
> > > Landscape
> > > > > has
> > > > > > pointed out problems that I've gone and fixed. But on the whole,
> I
> > > > > believe
> > > > > > that having it as part of our red / green PR evaluation -- equal
> to
> > > and
> > > > > > often superseding unit tests -- is harmful. I'd much rather be
> able
> > > to
> > > > > scan
> > > > > > the PR list and know unequivocally that "green" indicates ready
> to
> > > > merge.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > J
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Reply via email to