I will help you set the job up. On 15/04/15 12:34 pm, "Gaurav Aradhye" <gaurav.arad...@clogeny.com> wrote:
>Talluri, I still have to do it. Didn’t get enough time on it. Not a >jenkins expert. >Can anybody help me in setting jenkins job for tests which will do static >code analysis (python) and pep8 analysis? > >Regards, >Gaurav Aradhye > >On Apr 15, 2015, at 12:28 PM, Srikanteswararao Talluri ><srikanteswararao.tall...@citrix.com> wrote: > >> +1 >> >> Gaurav, >> >> You were talking about integrating static code analysis in >> jenkins.b.a.c.o. How is it going? >> >> Thanks, >> ~Talluri >> >> On 14/04/15 3:50 pm, "Sebastien Goasguen" <run...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> >>>> On Apr 14, 2015, at 9:06 AM, Gaurav Aradhye >>>> <gaurav.arad...@clogeny.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> Hi all, >>>> >>>> I feel that the test code in BVT and Regression tests (smoke and >>>> component folders) should be more consistent. There are feature >>>> developers adding tests into smoke and different test developers >>>>adding >>>> more tests into component folder, it is evident that inconsistencies >>>>are >>>> bound to arise. But with time, we should be striving to minimize them. >>>> >>>> I have listed few of the inconsistencies below. Feel free to add to >>>>the >>>> list if you think of more. >>>> >>>> 1. List Methods: >>>> >>>> If we want to list accounts, some tests use Account.list method, while >>>> some use list_accounts method. Both methods finally do the same thing, >>>> but there are many list methods in common.py file corresponding base >>>> class methods in base.py. This is code duplication. >>>> >>>> I feel that BaseClass.method() is more readable than list_xyz(), or >>>> should be preferred. >>>> >>>> >>>> 2. Checking empty/None lists: >>>> >>>> We already have validateList utility method which checks both empty >>>> lists and None objects. No need to use ³isinstance² method, or add >>>> additional None checks. >>>> >>>> >>>> 3. Pep8 issues: >>>> Many files are not pep8 consistent. In the past I have tried to fix >>>> pep8 issues in files and the mission is ON. Efforts need to be put >>>>into >>>> this. We already have autopep8 tool which does most of the things. >>>> >>> >>> +1 >>> >>> that¹s really a low hanging fruit and best practice. we should not be >>> merging anything that breaks pep8 >>> we should also add pylint tests >>> >>> checking for pep8 and python of all python code can be done at the high >>> level using something like tox, kind of like the RAT tests >>> >>>> >>>> I will be creating separate issues in JIRA for listed things. Everyone >>>> is welcome to add pull requests for these tasks. >>>> I personally will be putting more efforts into these in upcoming few >>>> months. 2-3 months and we should see most of the tests consistent with >>>> each other. >>>> >>>> Regards, >>>> Gaurav >
