[Pulp-dev] black

[David Davis]

Agreed. You don't have to use black to autoformat your code if you don't
want to. You could run black to check your code locally (with --check) or
wait to have travis do it for you like we do now with flake8. It's up to
you whether to autoformat your code or not.

Also, just FYI: I updated PUP-8 to add some of the concerns that were
raised in this thread and in the PR.

David


On Tue, Jun 18, 2019 at 9:50 AM Matt Pusateri <mpusater at redhat.com> wrote:

> I would argue that nothing stops you having pep8 down to muscle memory, it
> just means the autoformatter has less output :)
>
> Matt P.
>
> On Tue, Jun 18, 2019 at 9:32 AM Dana Walker <dawalker at redhat.com> wrote:
>
>> -0
>>
>> If we want devs free "from having to worry about formatting their code
>> while developing", I think that's doing both them and the community a
>> disservice in the long run.  I at least learn through doing, repetitively,
>> and think it would be more beneficial to have pep8 down to muscle memory in
>> time than to have an autoformatter doing it for me on this project and me
>> becoming more of a burden on a project that doesn't have one.
>>
>>
>> Dana Walker
>>
>> She / Her / Hers
>>
>> Software Engineer, Pulp Project
>>
>> Red Hat <https://www.redhat.com>
>>
>> dawalker at redhat.com
>> <https://www.redhat.com>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Jun 18, 2019 at 8:55 AM Kersom <kersom at redhat.com> wrote:
>>
>>> +1 to adopt black code style.
>>>
>>> Reasons already listed.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Jun 18, 2019 at 4:34 AM Tatiana Tereshchenko <
>>> ttereshc at redhat.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> -0
>>>>
>>>> I'm usually all for consistency, and having standard style sounds good
>>>> in theory.
>>>>
>>>> 1. What worries me is that there is basically no way back, we can't
>>>> just try it out.
>>>> Maybe waiting a bit to see if black has more adoption in the Python
>>>> community and goes GA is not a bad idea.
>>>>
>>>> 2. Is now the point when we desperately need autoformatter?
>>>> I don't work with many plugins but I read/review code a lot, including
>>>> pulpcore, pulpcore-plugin, pulp_file, pulp_rpm, pulp_maven, pulp_ansible
>>>> and a bit of pulp_docker.
>>>> I didn't encounter a noticeable difference in style which will make me
>>>> feel that I need to adopt to it.
>>>>
>>>> 3. If one of the goals is to make the code more readable, in my
>>>> subjective opinion, after black changes, it's 50/50.
>>>> Some parts are more readable, some parts are less. (just to be clear,
>>>> I'm NOT talking here about single or double quotes.)
>>>>
>>>> Tanya
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Jun 18, 2019 at 4:43 AM Daniel Alley <dalley at redhat.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> +0
>>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, Jun 17, 2019 at 1:15 PM Brian Bouterse <bbouters at redhat.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> +1 to adopting this. Thank you @daviddavis for writing
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Mon, Jun 10, 2019 at 1:58 PM David Davis <daviddavis at redhat.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I opened PUP-8 that proposes adopting black and pydocstyle[0] along
>>>>>>> with a PR against pulpcore to demonstrate how it would change pulpcore's
>>>>>>> code. Please review and respond with votes[2]. The deadline will be June
>>>>>>> 22, 2019.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> [0] https://github.com/pulp/pups/pull/17
>>>>>>> [1] https://github.com/pulp/pulpcore/pull/170
>>>>>>> [2] https://github.com/pulp/pups/blob/master/pup-0001.md#voting
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> David
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Tue, Jun 4, 2019 at 2:53 PM Simon Baatz <gmbnomis at gmail.com>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Tue, Jun 04, 2019 at 08:25:47AM -0400, David Davis wrote:
>>>>>>>> >    I wanted to get feedback from the Pulp community on using
>>>>>>>> black[0] to
>>>>>>>> >    auto-format our Pulp 3 code. I have some mixed feelings about
>>>>>>>> it as I
>>>>>>>> >    see some potential benefits of using it but also some
>>>>>>>> downsides as
>>>>>>>> >    well.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> +1 for black (pulp_cookbook uses black for a couple of months now).
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> Pulp-dev mailing list
>>>>>>> Pulp-dev at redhat.com
>>>>>>> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> Pulp-dev mailing list
>>>>>> Pulp-dev at redhat.com
>>>>>> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev
>>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Pulp-dev mailing list
>>>>> Pulp-dev at redhat.com
>>>>> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev
>>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Pulp-dev mailing list
>>>> Pulp-dev at redhat.com
>>>> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev
>>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Pulp-dev mailing list
>>> Pulp-dev at redhat.com
>>> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Pulp-dev mailing list
>> Pulp-dev at redhat.com
>> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Pulp-dev mailing list
> Pulp-dev at redhat.com
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/pulp-dev/attachments/20190618/fceb1686/attachment.htm>