On Tue, 16 Jun 2015 06:25:22 -0400 (EDT) Kamil Paral <kpa...@redhat.com> wrote:
> > After the meeting earlier today, I wanted to make a slightly > > different proposal. > > > > - if flake8 config in arcanist can be so configured, set max line > > width to 120 instead of 79 > > On my 1920px monitor, two windows with 100 columns fit perfectly next > to each other (11px font). Is there a strong desire to go over 100 > cols? It would make file comparisons less practical. And 100 (well, > 99) is still PEP8-approved. Yeah, 100 is fine by me. 120 was a somewhat arbitrary number that I thought I remembered from previous conversations > I have no problems exceeding that limit in certain specific cases. > For example, because we often bundle documentation with the source > code, and we format it with rst, it might happen that a large block > of text is indented far right and it makes it very long. Or there are > some code samples which can be wrapped but it makes them hard to > read. In such cases I have no problem having these particular lines > go to 120 (or even more, if needed). But this would be very > exceptional and almost never applied to regular code - no need to > worry about linter exceptions discussions, I think. > > PS: It seems that flake8 can't be configured in arcanist at the > moment. The patch was written [1] but abandoned and never pushed [2]. > It seems quite simple, though, so we could finish that up, if > desired. The other approach is to disable line length checking in > flake8 and use generic ArcanistTextLinter [3] for it, it's even > mentioned in the docs [4]. That should be less work. I think that we can work around this by putting config items in setup.cfg or tox.ini like they talk about in that revision (and why the author abandoned it, I think). > [1] https://secure.phabricator.com/D10512 > [2] > https://github.com/phacility/arcanist/blob/master/src/lint/linter/ArcanistFlake8Linter.php > [3] > https://github.com/phacility/arcanist/blob/master/src/lint/linter/ArcanistTextLinter.php > [4] > https://secure.phabricator.com/book/phabricator/article/arcanist_extending_lint/#arcanisttextlinter > > > > > - default to "no" on lint exceptions - the idea is to avoid > > spending time debating whether an exception is worth it or not. > > If I read this correctly as "we don't have a strict 0-exceptions > policy, but they should be very rare and if you propose one, you > should have a very good reason to do so", I think that's fine and > we'll see how that works in the next months. That's pretty much what I meant, yeah. Setting rigid "absolutely no exceptions ever" rules are generally a bad idea. Unavoidable at times but there are usually problems that come along with them. > > > > - until we get the codebase compliant "if you touch a file, fix the > > lint errors even if those errors are not part of what you're > > changing" > > Even though this will make our files a bit consistent (modified parts > looking a bit different than unmodified parts), I don't mind much and > I think that this approach is fine for the moment. Especially before > we find out if we're happy with the new approach. It will also > minimize the changes between develop and disposable-develop. Yeah, let's see how well this works out. Hopefully we'll be able to merge disposable-develop back into develop soon and we won't have 2 active-ish branches to keep up to date. Tim
pgpuSH644oNY9.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ qa-devel mailing list qa-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/qa-devel
