Re: [openstack-dev] [Ceilometer] Adding pylint checking of new ceilometer patches

2014-10-07 Thread Andrew Lazarev
I can't say I'm too deeply versed in the code, but it's enough to make me wonder if we want to go that direction and avoid the issues altogether? It's the nature of python that methods and modules can be added in runtime and pylint can't do full analysis. That's why the best use of it - limited

Re: [openstack-dev] [Ceilometer] Adding pylint checking of new ceilometer patches

2014-10-07 Thread Andrew Lazarev
At first step we won't implement pylint as gate job, but will add it at master to have a possibility to check code with pylint locally, if it is needed. No much sense in running it locally. It has too many false positives. The best use - see new critical errors as a non-voting job. Andrew. On

Re: [openstack-dev] [Ceilometer] Adding pylint checking of new ceilometer patches

2014-10-06 Thread Igor Degtiarov
My points are next: 1. Pylint check will be very useful for project, and will help to avoid critical errors or mistakes in code. 2. At first step we won't implement pylint as gate job, but will add it at master to have a possibility to check code with pylint locally, if it is needed. 3. In

[openstack-dev] [Ceilometer] Adding pylint checking of new ceilometer patches

2014-10-03 Thread Igor Degtiarov
Hi folks! I try too guess do we need in ceilometer checking new patches for critical errors with pylint? As far as I know Nova and Sahara and others have such check. Actually it is not checking of all project but comparing of the number of errors without new patch and with it, and if diff is

Re: [openstack-dev] [Ceilometer] Adding pylint checking of new ceilometer patches

2014-10-03 Thread Dina Belova
Igor, Personally this idea looks really nice to me, as this will help to avoid strange code being merged and not found via reviewing process. Cheers, Dina On Fri, Oct 3, 2014 at 12:40 PM, Igor Degtiarov idegtia...@mirantis.com wrote: Hi folks! I try too guess do we need in ceilometer

Re: [openstack-dev] [Ceilometer] Adding pylint checking of new ceilometer patches

2014-10-03 Thread Neal, Phil
From: Dina Belova [mailto:dbel...@mirantis.com] On Friday, October 03, 2014 2:53 AM Igor, Personally this idea looks really nice to me, as this will help to avoid strange code being merged and not found via reviewing process. Cheers, Dina On Fri, Oct 3, 2014 at 12:40 PM, Igor

Re: [openstack-dev] [Ceilometer] Adding pylint checking of new ceilometer patches

2014-10-03 Thread Doug Hellmann
On Oct 3, 2014, at 1:09 PM, Neal, Phil phil.n...@hp.com wrote: From: Dina Belova [mailto:dbel...@mirantis.com] On Friday, October 03, 2014 2:53 AM Igor, Personally this idea looks really nice to me, as this will help to avoid strange code being merged and not found via reviewing

Re: [openstack-dev] [Ceilometer] Adding pylint checking of new ceilometer patches

2014-10-03 Thread Angus Lees
You can turn off lots of the refactor recommendation checks. I've been running pylint across neutron and it's uncovered half a dozen legitimate bugs so far - and that's with many tests still disabled. I agree that the defaults are too noisy, but its about the only tool that does linting across