[Freeipa-devel] [PATCH] 14 Run lint during each build

[Adam Young]

On 04/27/2011 09:34 AM, Dmitri Pal wrote:
> On 04/27/2011 08:13 AM, Jan Cholasta wrote:
>> On 27.4.2011 13:17, Martin Kosek wrote:
>>> On Wed, 2011-04-27 at 12:40 +0200, Jan Cholasta wrote:
>>>> On 26.4.2011 18:14, Martin Kosek wrote:
>>>>> On Tue, 2011-04-26 at 13:42 +0200, Jan Cholasta wrote:
>>>>>> Automatically run the lint script during make rpms|client-rpms|srpms.
>>>>>>
>>>>> NACK until ticket 1184 is resolved and pushed. Currently, pylint check
>>>>> fails when optional python packages (like python-rhsm) are not
>>>>> installed
>>>>> on the machine. We should be able to build IPA without those packages
>>>>> installed.
>>>> I think printing a note asking the developer to kindly install the
>>>> missing packages would be sufficient. AFAIK there are currently only 2
>>>> optional packages: python-rhsm and python-krbV. python-krbV is optional
>>>> only for the client part of IPA, so you most likely have it already
>>>> installed and installing python-rhsm is not really much of a chore.
>>>> That
>>>> way all of the code would always be checked and the lint script
>>>> would be
>>>> free of the unnecessary complexity of handling missing packages.
>>> I don't think this is a right approach. When the package is optional
>>> (currently it may be python-rhsm and python-krbV only, but there may be
>>> others in the future) I shouldn't be obliged to install them in order to
>>> build IPA.
>> You shouldn't be obliged to install them as a user. As a developer,
>> you should be ready for all kinds of crazy stuff IMHO.
>>
>>> When somebody develops something related with the optional
>>> package he has them installed and the lint will check the relevant code
>>> too.
>> All of the code goes to the package, so it all should be checked
>> during the build.
>>
>> Imagine situation like this: You change something in module A,
>> accidentally breaking functionality that module B depends on. Module A
>> is checked and no error is found (because it's the kind of issue that
>> exhibits itself only in certain conditions). Module B isn't checked,
>> because it also depends on a not-installed optional package. If it was
>> checked, it would report an error that would lead you to the error in
>> module A. But everything looks fine, so the build succeeds, even when
>> the error is there.
>>
>> The situation might be improbable, but IMO the code should be checked
>> in the same ecosystem every time anyway, because weird stuff could
>> happen if it wasn't.
>>
>>> It is not that big deal, I just think it would be an annoyance for
>>> developers. But maybe there is a different opinion.
>> I know we developers are lazy folk, but this is a matter of writing
>> one simple command, just one time.
>>
>>> Martin
>>>
>>
> How about a compromise?
> By default everything is expected to be installed.
> But there is a command line switch that allows to skip modules you want
> to skip. You provide the switch and the list of the modules to skip and
> build will validate only modules that are not in the list.
>
> Will something like this work?
>
Actually, make the command line switch just means that a  Lint failure 
doesn't stop the build.  That way, by default the build will fail unless 
everything is there and checked, but there is a way to move forward for 
building with a subset of packages.