On Sun, 16 Jan 2022, Miro Hrončok wrote:
On 15. 01. 22 20:22, Andrew C Aitchison wrote:
On Sat, 15 Jan 2022, Miro Hrončok wrote:
python-pytest-cov is something I've lobbied has no business in an
enterprise distro at all.
... ...
As for EPEL I strongly suggest not to introduce python-pytest-cov either.
If your package depends on it, please drop the dependency instead, see
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Python/#_linters
In %check, packages SHOULD NOT run “linters”: code style checkers, test
coverage checkers and other tools that check code quality rather than
functionality.
Agreed.
Linters do make sense in upstream CI. But not in Fedora.
Not inside Fedora *packages*, but
if these tools are not available to those using RHEL, Fedora or EPEL
is that a suitable platform for CI or for developers ?
Yes, most certainly it is a sustainable *platform* for CI. On such platform,
you install your dev-dependendencies from PyPI. Not from the platform itself.
Hmm.
A linter is a tool.
I cannot build most packages without a C compiler and I don't see many
packages with
BuildRequires: gcc
yet I expect a dev platform to include a C compiler.
--
Andrew C. Aitchison Kendal, UK
andrew@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
_______________________________________________
epel-devel mailing list -- epel-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to epel-devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/epel-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
