launchpad-dev team mailing list archive

[Curtis Hovey <curtis.hovey@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Thu, 2010-03-11 at 16:15 +0000, Jonathan Lange wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 4:02 PM, Tom Berger <tom.berger@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
...
> >> Since make lint will always report the issue, I strongly suspect
> >> engineers are not running make lint at all.
> >
> > Another thing that happens quite a lot (and I must admit I'm guilty
> > myself) is that people do run lint, but ignore warnings that they know
> > for certain are not a result of the changes they introduced. If we
> > want to enforce lint we could have buildbot run it, but if we do we'll
> > have to make sure it produces a reasonable set of warnings.
> >
> 
> I suspect that the correct thing is to have a check that stops new
> lint from being added. That way, once someone fixes some lint, the
> amount of lint is permanently reduced. It also would spare us the
> tedious exercise of getting the amount to zero before adding enforcing
> rules.

I like this idea. We have not been successful in the past. Our pylint
setting are are not checking things like docstrings because it was
considered too much of a burden to fix. The idea was to get most of the
lint out of lp's code before we made standard stricter.

> Alternatively, we could add a unit test that asserts that the amount
> of lint is a particular number, and then have an honesty policy of
> never increasing the number. I think Bazaar do this for some of their
> performance tests.

Adding a test to get a score might be something we can graph. I like
pictures.


-- 
__Curtis C. Hovey_________
http://launchpad.net/

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part