On 22 February 2018 at 16:08, Antoine Pitrou <solip...@pitrou.net> wrote:
> On Thu, 22 Feb 2018 07:51:17 -0800
> Steve Dower <steve.do...@python.org> wrote:
>> It then becomes grunt work for reviewers, who also have to carefully balance 
>> encouraging new contributors against preventing the code base from getting 
>> worse.
> That's a fair point I hadn't considered.  OTOH the style issues I
> usually comment on as a reviewer aren't the kind that would be caught
> by an automated style check (I tend to ask for comments or docstrings,
> or be nitpicky about some variable or function name).  YMMV :-)
>> I’d rather have a review bot that can detect problems in PRs and comment on 
>> them. We can choose to merge anyway and it won’t keep being noisy, but it 
>> also saves committers from potentially telling someone their contribution 
>> isn’t welcome because of their camelCase.
> Yeah, that sounds like an interesting feature.

My experience on pip is that automated style review is helpful for
avoiding debates over subjective details. But it does result in a
certain level of "tweak to satisfy the style checker" churn in PRs.
That can be frustrating when CI takes a long time to run.

Python-Dev mailing list

Reply via email to