From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5EFE3138247 for ; Sun, 19 Jan 2014 23:53:29 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id A3BC5E0D2D; Sun, 19 Jan 2014 23:53:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-wg0-f42.google.com (mail-wg0-f42.google.com [74.125.82.42]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EB942E0CE5 for ; Sun, 19 Jan 2014 23:53:26 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-wg0-f42.google.com with SMTP id l18so3449840wgh.5 for ; Sun, 19 Jan 2014 15:53:25 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=+Fc03mH3Oa+oVrFyN9c7kkyRnL2z2yTmtmwMYvNXEDQ=; b=baq09dNIBUZq3zfV3FPzl4x1TNL2Xs+qtwpaHbb7Hzq/4eC+gKkH3WE5WWbmau62r8 QYlWR/LqL4Dcs9TPpco5mO/kUgEDAWXi/Bp29CfwYBOw+EKNSLqW4H6wTHVVWcgaJPLR TDo17LYWCKhMPUs+2PnjKnnNWyJQ7ZRld8yYlBe1rjJQb1Ni2T9C+Pk/3TyjoUDl0xd0 vWLa3TQL7LC1gg4PCLjF6It56l+c1srbopbALjfo5e886bFIeMtDpd2XCMPGhd6A0FjR yPnywyOE7bWl+6+o+3/11tzSZSaZOntjPoRVOMR8PK0ZGwhjE55jpjIMX1oewbA9SC9F 5+OQ== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQlDMtEX7OMkEJVJhHpmAyXh7lVrVghSWO1NKKLVLGCCRoe2dFJcURHSlIUxgjBqA/JuaCcc Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-portage-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-portage-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.180.188.230 with SMTP id gd6mr7613306wic.15.1390175605639; Sun, 19 Jan 2014 15:53:25 -0800 (PST) Sender: antarus@scriptkitty.com Received: by 10.216.170.129 with HTTP; Sun, 19 Jan 2014 15:53:25 -0800 (PST) X-Originating-IP: [173.8.165.226] In-Reply-To: <52DC64F4.7070000@plaimi.net> References: <52DC421E.1050402@gmx.de> <52DC55A0.9020300@plaimi.net> <52DC56BB.1010308@plaimi.net> <52DC64F4.7070000@plaimi.net> Date: Sun, 19 Jan 2014 15:53:25 -0800 X-Google-Sender-Auth: GWIICUkP0_ohb-qBhpx5KLWbY58 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH 0/3] Initial fetch() refactoring From: Alec Warner To: gentoo-portage-dev@lists.gentoo.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11c383c6265e9e04f05b7b73 X-Archives-Salt: 6d4a2d68-850d-495c-9b1c-30f5c071478e X-Archives-Hash: 7aa3851db772afec1e7e9bd91cdbe459 --001a11c383c6265e9e04f05b7b73 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 On Sun, Jan 19, 2014 at 3:51 PM, Alexander Berntsen wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA256 > > On 19/01/14 23:54, Alec Warner wrote: > > I'm very against add a bunch of extra rules that have to be > > enforced by hand. I want to make it easy to contribute, not more > > difficult. If bob can run a tool that tells him all the things > > that are wrong with his patch, that avoids us having like 1/3rd of > > the conversations on list ;) > Feel free to write a tool for this, or to contribute to any of the > numerous linters and/or editor plug-ins. It would be much appreciated. > > I already prefer pylint, and I think it does cover most of what I want. I am working a pylintrc patch. > As for the difficulty of PEP 257... I have higher hopes for Portage > contributors than getting stuck at that. If I write a patch that makes > most of the docstrings follow it, then they can infer 99% of the > "extra rules" by just looking at the other functions and methods. If > they fail to comply, we can just mention it. If the docstring > formatting is the biggest issue with their patch, I doubt they'll have > a hard time fixing it. > I'm not saying its hard, I'm saying it is a giant waste of time for the list to tell people 'hey your docstrings are wrong' when they can just run a tool to do it ;) -A > - -- > Alexander > alexander@plaimi.net > http://plaimi.net/~alexander > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) > Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ > > iF4EAREIAAYFAlLcZPQACgkQRtClrXBQc7XizAD/Y/Gxc7N6VkgNFWRgP5lmQ84r > UwSne2xaqJYphY9x1TcBAIRpjBHB580edLz/8zpT14lqhW3oOmeMz0pNMB8ssW5d > =+zp5 > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- > > --001a11c383c6265e9e04f05b7b73 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On S= un, Jan 19, 2014 at 3:51 PM, Alexander Berntsen <alexander@plaimi.net> wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESS= AGE-----
Hash: SHA256

On 19/01/14 23:54, Alec Warner wrote:
> I'm very against add a bunch of extra rules that have to be
> enforced by hand. I want to make it easy to contribute, not more
> difficult. If bob can run a tool that tells him all the things
> that are wrong with his patch, that avoids us having like 1/3rd of
> the conversations on list ;)
Feel free to write a tool for this, or to contribute to any of the numerous linters and/or editor plug-ins. It would be much appreciated.


I already prefer pylint, and I think i= t does cover most of what I want. I am working a pylintrc patch.
= =C2=A0
As for the difficulty of PEP 257... I have higher hopes for Portage
contributors than getting stuck at that. If I write a patch that makes
most of the docstrings follow it, then they can infer 99% of the
"extra rules" by just looking at the other functions and methods.= If
they fail to comply, we can just mention it. If the docstring
formatting is the biggest issue with their patch, I doubt they'll have<= br> a hard time fixing it.

I'm not sayi= ng its hard, I'm saying it is a giant waste of time for the list to tel= l people 'hey your docstrings are wrong' when they can just run a t= ool to do it ;)

-A


=C2=A0
=
- --
Alexander
alexander@plaimi.net
http://plaimi.ne= t/~alexander
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/

iF4EAREIAAYFAlLcZPQACgkQRtClrXBQc7XizAD/Y/Gxc7N6VkgNFWRgP5lmQ84r
UwSne2xaqJYphY9x1TcBAIRpjBHB580edLz/8zpT14lqhW3oOmeMz0pNMB8ssW5d
=3D+zp5
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


--001a11c383c6265e9e04f05b7b73--