On Dec 31, 2013 3:00 PM, "Michael Still" wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jan 1, 2014 at 9:46 AM, Joe Gordon wrote:
> > A little late, but here is the patch to put this into hacking.
> >
> > https://review.openstack.org/#/c/64584/
> >
> >
> > And here is it running against nova:
> >
http://logs.openstack.org/8
On Wed, Jan 1, 2014 at 9:46 AM, Joe Gordon wrote:
> A little late, but here is the patch to put this into hacking.
>
> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/64584/
>
>
> And here is it running against nova:
> http://logs.openstack.org/84/64584/1/check/gate-hacking-integration-nova/b31c47e/console.html
A little late, but here is the patch to put this into hacking.
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/64584/
And here is it running against nova:
http://logs.openstack.org/84/64584/1/check/gate-hacking-integration-nova/b31c47e/console.html
On Mon, Nov 18, 2013 at 5:23 PM, Vishvananda Ishaya
wrote:
On Mon, Nov 18, 2013 at 8:23 PM, Vishvananda Ishaya
wrote:
>
>
> +1 to sticking something in hacking. FWIW I would probably do the following
> to avoid the debate altogether:
>
> result = self._path_file_exists(ds_browser, folder_path, file_name)
> folder_exists, file_exists, file_size_in_kb, disk_
On Nov 14, 2013, at 10:00 AM, Monty Taylor wrote:
>
>
> On 11/13/2013 08:08 PM, Robert Collins wrote:
>> On 14 November 2013 13:59, Sean Dague wrote:
>>
>>> This is an area where we actually have consensus in our docs (have had
>>> for a while), the reviewer was being consistent with them, a
On 11/13/2013 08:08 PM, Robert Collins wrote:
> On 14 November 2013 13:59, Sean Dague wrote:
>
>> This is an area where we actually have consensus in our docs (have had
>> for a while), the reviewer was being consistent with them, and it feels
>> like you are reopening that for personal prefere
On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 10:03 AM, Joe Gordon wrote:
>
> On Nov 14, 2013 6:58 AM, "Dolph Mathews" wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 6:46 PM, Robert Collins
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi so - in http://docs.openstack.org/developer/hacking/
>>>
>>> it has as bullet point 4:
>>> Long lines should be wr
On Nov 14, 2013 6:58 AM, "Dolph Mathews" wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 6:46 PM, Robert Collins
wrote:
>>
>> Hi so - in http://docs.openstack.org/developer/hacking/
>>
>> it has as bullet point 4:
>> Long lines should be wrapped in parentheses in preference to using a
>> backslash for line
On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 6:46 PM, Robert Collins
wrote:
> Hi so - in http://docs.openstack.org/developer/hacking/
>
> it has as bullet point 4:
> Long lines should be wrapped in parentheses in preference to using a
> backslash for line continuation.
>
> I'm seeing in some reviews a request for () o
On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 2:34 PM, Chris Behrens wrote:
>
> On Nov 13, 2013, at 6:55 PM, Robert Collins
> wrote:
>
> > On 14 November 2013 15:28, Chris Behrens wrote:
> >> For this example, I'd look at using parens on the left side to see if
> that helps. I also, like Sean, really dislike the loo
On 14 November 2013 19:34, Chris Behrens wrote:
>
> (foo, bar, baz =
>> File "", line 1
>>(foo, bar, baz =
>> ^
>> SyntaxError: invalid syntax
>
> Right. I was thinking something like this:
>
> (folder_exists, file_exists,
> file_size_in_kb, disk_extents) = self._path
On Nov 13, 2013, at 6:55 PM, Robert Collins wrote:
> On 14 November 2013 15:28, Chris Behrens wrote:
>> For this example, I'd look at using parens on the left side to see if that
>> helps. I also, like Sean, really dislike the look of \.
>
> I dislike \ most of the time too :).
>
:)
>
>>
On 14 November 2013 15:28, Chris Behrens wrote:
> For this example, I'd look at using parens on the left side to see if that
> helps. I also, like Sean, really dislike the look of \.
I dislike \ most of the time too :).
>>> (foo, bar, baz =
File "", line 1
(foo, bar, baz =
For this example, I'd look at using parens on the left side to see if that
helps. I also, like Sean, really dislike the look of \.
> On Nov 13, 2013, at 5:08 PM, Robert Collins wrote:
>
>> On 14 November 2013 13:59, Sean Dague wrote:
>>
>> This is an area where we actually have consensus in
On 14 November 2013 13:59, Sean Dague wrote:
> This is an area where we actually have consensus in our docs (have had
> for a while), the reviewer was being consistent with them, and it feels
> like you are reopening that for personal preference.
Sorry that it feels that way. My personal code al
> I'd like us to avoid meaningless reviewer churn here:
I'd like us to avoid trivial style guideline churn :)
> The case that made me raise this is this:
> folder_exists, file_exists, file_size_in_kb, disk_extents = \
> self._path_file_exists(ds_browser, folder_path, file_name)
>
> W
On 11/13/2013 07:46 PM, Robert Collins wrote:
> Hi so - in http://docs.openstack.org/developer/hacking/
>
> it has as bullet point 4:
> Long lines should be wrapped in parentheses in preference to using a
> backslash for line continuation.
>
> I'm seeing in some reviews a request for () over \ ev
Hi so - in http://docs.openstack.org/developer/hacking/
it has as bullet point 4:
Long lines should be wrapped in parentheses in preference to using a
backslash for line continuation.
I'm seeing in some reviews a request for () over \ even when \ is
significantly clearer.
I'd like us to avoid me
18 matches
Mail list logo
