[openstack-dev] [all] Why do we have project specific hacking rules?

Ian Cordasco sigmavirus24 at gmail.com
Wed Oct 5 15:33:17 UTC 2016


 

-----Original Message-----
From: Ihar Hrachyshka <ihrachys at redhat.com>
Reply: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) <openstack-dev at lists.openstack.org>
Date: October 5, 2016 at 10:30:32
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) <openstack-dev at lists.openstack.org>
Subject:  Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Why do we have project specific hacking rules?

> Ian Cordasco wrote:
>  
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Tony Breeds  
> > Reply: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> > , OpenStack Development Mailing List
> > (not for usage questions)  
> > Date: October 5, 2016 at 08:14:40
> > To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> >  
> > Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Why do we have project specific
> > hacking rules?
> >
> >> On Wed, Oct 05, 2016 at 07:56:15AM -0500, Ian Cordasco wrote:
> >>
> >>> So hacking doesn't push out to anyone. It's one of the projects that
> >>> doesn't
> >>> get updated by global-requirements updates, if I remember correctly.
> >>
> >> Just clarifying/confirming what Ian says.
> >>
> >> The proposal-bot does not generate updates to projects
> >> *requirements.txt. It's
> >> up to the projects to do that themselves.
> >>
> >> Having said that it *could* all the code is there but it was disabled
> >> for a reason.
> >
> > Right. Thank you for clarifying, Tony.
> >
> > I believe several projects didn't want Hacking to auto-update and break
> > things. With off-by-default rules (and the proliferation of them in
> > Hacking) I don't think this is the most valid of concerns anymore. The
> > only problem would be that pycodestyle and pyflakes frequently add new
> > checks in releases means that the way Hacking pins Flake8 and
> > itsdependencies is still necessary. We need to figure out how to keep
> > up-to-date with our upstream dependencies without causing problems for
> > projects. Until we do that, we should probably just keep our current
> > methodology of letting projects update when they want to and can afford
> > developer time to update.
>  
> I believe those transitive dependencies could be effectively pinned thru
> upper-constraints.txt mechanism.

They're already pinned (not using upper-constraints). I'm sorry I wasn't clear about that.

--  
Ian Cordasco




More information about the OpenStack-dev mailing list