Keep in mind pre-commit tool != git-hooks, is like confusing JavaScript with Java ;)

By default pre-commit does not install any hooks. Yes, you can install them, but in 9/10 cases I don't, I only have an alias pc="pre-commit run -a" which I run before each git-review. In fact I was considering adding an optional feature to git-review to auto run this when the repository has a .pre-commit-config.yml file.

I am glad someone else opened the pre-commit subject before me. While it comes with its own challenges (git cloning), pre-commit resolves the problem of having predictable linter results by pinning them. Also it enables vey easy bumping of all of them.

AFAIK, over the last year I removed hacking from several projects and replaced it with pre-commit and I am much happier.

Not sure if others know but both bashate and doc8 can be used from pre-commit too.

Extra bonus: we can avoid the case where we end-up having tons of jobs performing linting or style checks. 

On 22 Nov 2019, at 13:11, Sean Mooney <smooney@redhat.com> wrote:

On Thu, 2019-11-21 at 15:32 -0800, Dan Smith wrote:
nova only has a couple but it might be intersting to convert those to precommit scripts.
looking through them some of them do seam useful although other are just python 2 vs python 3
guidline that i hope will be less relevant now.

I would so very much love if we did NOT do that. Precommit hooks are
super annoying for writing up quick PoCs and DNM patches, which we do a
lot.
ya true although i was referign to the precommit framework which we previously disucssed and said
shoudl be optional to install. do you think we should keep/maintain hacking in nova and or port these
to something else if not? anyway it was just a thought i dont want it to be mandaroy on every commit
for the poc hacking reason either but it might be a way to keep the checks without having to contiue to
maintain hacking.

--Dan