8000 Ruff by gswifort · Pull Request #279 · CEXT-Dan/PyRx · GitHub
[go: up one dir, main page]
More Web Proxy on the site http://driver.im/
Skip to content
8000

Ruff #279

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom
Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Apr 18, 2025
Merged

Ruff #279

merged 3 commits into from
Apr 18, 2025

Conversation

gswifort
Copy link
Collaborator

Added ruff configuration to pyproject.toml and .pre-commit-config.yaml and formatted files

@CEXT-Dan CEXT-Dan merged commit 795fc5a into CEXT-Dan:main Apr 18, 2025
1 check failed
@CEXT-Dan
Copy link
Owner

do you get notifications if a workflow fails?

@rdesparbes
Copy link
Collaborator
rdesparbes commented Apr 18, 2025 •
edited
Loading

Just a suggestion: should the pull requests be accepted if the checks do not pass?

@gswifort
Copy link
Collaborator Author

do you get notifications if a workflow fails?

Yes

@gswifort
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Just a suggestion: should the pull requests be accepted if the checks do not pass?

I fully agree. I tested this PR locally, ruff showed "All checks passed!". I don't know if it's possible, or if it's some mistake I'm not seeing, but it looks like locally ruff understands import PyRx as first-party section (that's why it separated it from other Py* modules) but on github it doesn't.

@rdesparbes
Copy link
Collaborator

Just a suggestion: should the pull requests be accepted if the checks do not pass?

I fully agree. I tested this PR locally, ruff showed "All checks passed!". I don't know if it's possible, or if it's some mistake I'm not seeing, but it looks like locally ruff understands import PyRx as first-party section (that's why it separated it from other Py* modules) but on github it doesn't.

For some reason, I thought Windows runners for Github Actions were not available for free, so I chose Ubuntu latest (24.04). But it looks like they are.

As this projet is pretty specific to Windows, it does not really make sense to use something else for Actions.The difference in OS might explain the different behavior (or ruff's version?)

@CEXT-Dan
Copy link
Owner

do you get notifications if a workflow fails?

Okay, I was just wondering, I won’t be old auntie and resend them 😀

Just a suggestion: should the pull requests be accepted if the checks do not pass?

Blocking errors: like compile errors, I would reject unless there’s a note for a reason why, like “help me”.
Non-blocking errors: is okay for a workflow or test to fail for a reasonable amount of time. Due to the nature of the project supporting many platforms Example, if someone is not able to generate stubs for BricsCAD. Or just waiting to see how our workflow server responds.

it does not really make sense to use something else for Actions

Regarding the workflow server type, it’s been my experience that it can take considerable amount of time to get a handle on a windows server. Workflow’s are free up to a cap, note that windows server time costs are double that of ubuntu.
ubuntu is preferred, but I don't insist. That would be something we could look at more closely once I get a bill 😁

@gswifort
Copy link
Collaborator Author
gswifort 6FD8 commented Apr 19, 2025

I think Ubuntu is ok for ruff, especially since it detected the error better than on windows.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers
No reviews
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
3 participants
@gswifort @CEXT-Dan @rdesparbes
0