Open Stack

On 11/19/2012 09:15 PM, Brian Waldon wrote:
>
> On Nov 19, 2012, at 4:28 PM, Brian Waldon wrote:
>
>>
>> On Nov 19, 2012, at 4:16 PM, Chuck Short wrote:
>>
>>> On 12-11-19 06:40 PM, Joe Gordon wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 3:06 PM, Monty Taylor
>>>> <mordred at inaugust.com <mailto:mordred at inaugust.com>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I think these are orthogonal. In general I believe we're in
>>>> agreement that we should be targetting the same version of
>>>> pep8, and that we should pin that version early in the cycle.
>>>> However we install that version of pep8 is a different
>>>> argument.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Targeting the same version of pep8 is only part of the problem,
>>>> we would also need to agree on what rules to ignore. For
>>>> example:
>>>>
>>>> glance (pep8 1.3.3) ignores: E125,E126,E711,E712 nova (pep8
>>>> 1.2) ignores: E12,E711,E721 keystone (pep8 1.3.3) ignores: ---
>>>
>>> Is there a reason why these were ignored?
>>
>> I just ran glance's pep8 check without ignoring any errors, and it
>> appears most of them are just arbitrary spacing. I'll attempt to
>> minimize the number of pep8 violations we ignore.
>
> After walking through the type of errors we're ignoring, I'm not
> actually comfortable removing any of the PEP8 violations (E125, E126,
> E711, E712) from Glance's ignore list. The first two are quite
> fragile and enforce a somewhat awkward coding style, while the second
> two are asking us to write code that is incompatible with sqlalchemy.
> Hopefully the maintainers will help improve this situation.

What about downgrading our pep8 level to 1.2? It doesn't sound like 
people are really thrilled in general with 1.3...