-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
Merljin I did not want to criticize you I just don't agree with "That would make the bot completely useless" I find it useful as it is already! As mentioned it would be good to have pep8 but I would be careful with FORCING it by blocking non-pep8-compilant patches/changes because first of all that would just increase the workload to us.
- all code passes pep8 validation 2) someone uploads a patchset
that adds a mistake: the merged repository does not pass validation 3) the bot reports the patchset failed validation 4) the change is merged -> the repository no longer passes validation!
Yes that's of course what can (and according to Murphy also will) happen, but I would just mark susch a commit as bug or at least "to be improved" and fix it. I mean nothing will break if the code is not pep8. It will still work. It is just not that clean and pure anymore.
And because the repository no longer passes validation, the bot will also report 'failure' on any following patchset!
There it would be nice if the bot could be patched in order to become such smart that it can mark this as follow-up to the buggy patchset that was not pep8.
As such, the repository needs to always pass validation. To make sure the repository always passes validation, no changes should be merged if they fail validation. The easiest way to prevent the changes to be merged is to set the bot to voting.
IMHO this is what should be done for unittests strictly but for pep8 it should be tolerant. unittests say that the code does not work. pep8 just says that the code might be ugly. First is strict but second not.
Greetings and thanks a lot for your effort on this!! DrTrigon