potiuk commented on issue #339: URL: https://github.com/apache/tooling-trusted-releases/issues/339#issuecomment-3567218695
> This is a moot optimization, at the cost of clarity. IMO, of course. If you can fully automate it with ruff (that it will even correct it automatically) and have a common agreement on the convention, I think it's worth it IMHO. It's of course pre-emptive measure and I am also a big fan of "optimise what mkes impact", but in this case It's a metter of automation of convention and sticking to it (especially if that convention is widely followed and teaches good practices. But - to be honest - it's not something I am going to argue about - first and more important people to decide aboout it are those who actively work on it and who contribute most. I wish we had a rule that you can comment on the conventions after you made significant number of commits to the repo, otherwise this is just "idle talking". First "walk the walk" in the repo before you "talk the talk" - and yes that also applies to me, that's why i try to make my comments mostly as helpful and reasoning rather than "demanding changes". I hope it's seen like that, and I hope the issue itself is not "demanding changes" but it's more an invitation do discussion, despite the "should be documented" tone that indicates some universal rule that has no context to understand and "put your hands dirty" first before making demands. -- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: [email protected] --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
