Great, thanks for the info. Then I'm +1 on adopting the use of pydocstyle to have great docstrings. AIUI this was the original desire of @mdellweg's proposal.
On Tue, Jun 4, 2019 at 10:30 AM David Davis <davidda...@redhat.com> wrote: > Black doesn't format docstrings[0] so it won't really help us. Flake8 is a > wrapper for a collection of tools and the one that lints docstrings > (pydocstyle[1]) can be run independently without flake8. So I think this > questions around how/if to lint docstrings and whether or not we want to > use black are independent. > > [0] https://github.com/python/black/issues/144 > [1] https://github.com/PyCQA/pydocstyle > > David > > > On Tue, Jun 4, 2019 at 10:05 AM Brian Bouterse <bbout...@redhat.com> > wrote: > >> @mdellweg if we adopt Black broadly, how does that affect your proposal >> here? >> >> On Tue, May 21, 2019 at 11:50 AM Austin Macdonald <aus...@redhat.com> >> wrote: >> >>> Something else to consider: some docstrings are rendered as user-facing >>> documentation in the autogenerated REST docs. This means that docstring >>> linting needs to be ignored for ViewSets. For example, I have a PR open >>> that alters pulp_file viewset docstrings to contain html, to pass the >>> linter, we have add docstring exceptions to the flake8 config. >>> >>> My initial reaction is that we might be better off keeping the >>> flake8-docstring package out of pulplift, and we should also remove it from >>> travis. >>> >>> >>> On Tue, May 21, 2019 at 11:08 AM Matthias Dellweg <dell...@atix.de> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> tl;dr: Docstring linting is inconsistent across pulp repositories. >>>> To make it consistent, do we want to enforce it everywhere, and repair >>>> more than 700 findings? >>>> >>>> What started out as a oneliner [0] surfaced as a bigger problem: >>>> >>>> Whether flake8 performs linting on docstrings is solely dependent >>>> (afaik) on the existence of a specific python package >>>> (flake8-docstring) in the system. >>>> At the same time, there are repositories (pulpcore, >>>> pulpcore-plugin, ???) that do not install this package in their ci >>>> pipeline, as well as repos that do (pulp_deb, pulp_ansible, ???). >>>> So it is hard to select whether it should be installed in a pulplift >>>> source box. >>>> Not installing it means, there are linting errors showing up in >>>> travis only, however installing it will prevent linting pulpcore >>>> locally. >>>> That said, i think we should follow the same linting rules in all >>>> repositories, and more specific i tend to include docstring linting. >>>> However there are over 700 findings in pulpcore alone. >>>> >>>> [0] https://github.com/pulp/pulpcore/pull/138 >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Pulp-dev mailing list >>>> Pulp-dev@redhat.com >>>> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev >>>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Pulp-dev mailing list >>> Pulp-dev@redhat.com >>> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> Pulp-dev mailing list >> Pulp-dev@redhat.com >> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev >> >
_______________________________________________ Pulp-dev mailing list Pulp-dev@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev
