[openstack-dev] Dropping or weakening the 'only import modules' style guideline - H302

Morgan Fainberg m at metacloud.com
Tue Aug 6 20:44:08 UTC 2013

While I'm torn on this as a developer, it comes down to an ease of
understanding the code.  In all cases, it is easier to understand where
something comes from if you only import modules.  Enforcing the import of
modules tends to also ensure namespace conflicts don't occur as often.
 When it comes to review, I am going to agree with Sean here, it is a boon
on large changes.  I am against lessening/removing H302; but I understand
why people desire it eased up.

Morgan Fainberg

IRC: morganfainberg

On Tue, Aug 6, 2013 at 1:18 PM, Christopher Armstrong <
chris.armstrong at rackspace.com> wrote:

> On Tue, Aug 6, 2013 at 6:32 AM, Sean Dague <sean at dague.net> wrote:
>> The reason we go hard and fast on certain rules is to reduce review time
>> by people. If something is up for debate we get bikeshedding in reviews
>> where one reviewer tells someone to do it one way, 2 days later they update
>> their review, another reviewer comes in and tells them to do it the
>> otherway. (This is not theoretical, it happens quite often, if you do a lot
>> of reviews you see it all the time.) It also ends up being something
>> reviewers can stop caring about, because the machine will pick it up.
>> Giving them the ability to focus on higher order issues, and still keeping
>> the code from natural entropy.
>> MUST == computer can do it, less work for core review time (which is
>> realistically one of our most constrained resources in OpenStack)
>> MAY == humans have to make a judgement call, which means more work for
>> our already constrained review teams
>> I've found H302 to really be useful on reviewing large chunks of code
>> I've not been in much before. And get seriously annoyed being in projects
>> that don't have it enforced yet (tempest is guilty of that). Being able to
>> quickly know what namespace things are out of saves time.
> I think it's really unfortunate that people will block patches based on
> stylistic concerns. The answer, IMO, is to codify in policy that stylistic
> issues *cannot* block a patch from landing.
> I recommend having humility in our reviews. Instead of
> "This bike shed needs to be painted red. -1"
> One should say
> "I prefer red for the color of bike sheds. You can do that if you want,
> but go ahead and merge anyway if you don't want to. +0"
> and don't mark a review as -1 if it *only* has bikeshedding in it. I would
> love to see a culture of reviewing that emphasizes functional correctness,
> politeness, and mutual education.
> And given the rationale from Robert Collins, I agree that the
> module-import thing should be one of the flakes that allows exceptions.
> --
> IRC: radix
> Christopher Armstrong
> Rackspace
> _______________________________________________
> OpenStack-dev mailing list
> OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20130806/2e0b79d2/attachment.html>

More information about the OpenStack-dev mailing list