[Pulp-dev] black

Thu Jun 27 11:58:38 UTC 2019

Follow up question to adding support for black: should we drop flake8? We
shouldn't need it anymore since black is pep8 compliant but I'm happy to
keep it around at least temporarily if people prefer?

David

On Mon, Jun 24, 2019 at 5:54 PM David Davis <daviddavis at redhat.com> wrote:

> Per our PUP voting guidelines, PUP-8 has passed and been merged. I filed
> the required issues in an epic[0].
>
> Thank you to everyone that voted and participated in the discussion.
>
> [0] https://pulp.plan.io/issues/5019
>
> David
>
>
> On Mon, Jun 24, 2019 at 11:28 AM Ina Panova <ipanova at redhat.com> wrote:
>
>> -0. Fully agree with Tanya's 3rd point of observation.
>>
>> --------
>> Regards,
>>
>> Ina Panova
>> Senior Software Engineer| Pulp| Red Hat Inc.
>>
>> "Do not go where the path may lead,
>>  go instead where there is no path and leave a trail."
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Jun 19, 2019 at 5:22 PM Austin Macdonald <amacdona at redhat.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> +1. I like the consistency but it's easy to overwhelm new contributors
>>> with minor style comments, even if they are "standard".
>>>
>>> On Tue, Jun 18, 2019 at 5:55 PM David Davis <daviddavis at redhat.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> 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
>>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> 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/20190627/c2e1ce74/attachment.htm>