I will help you set the job up.
On 15/04/15 12:34 pm, "Gaurav Aradhye" <gaurav.aradhye@clogeny.com> wrote:
>Talluri, I still have to do it. Didn’t get enough time on it. Not a
>jenkins expert.
>Can anybody help me in setting jenkins job for tests which will do static
>code analysis (python) and pep8 analysis?
>
>Regards,
>Gaurav Aradhye
>
>On Apr 15, 2015, at 12:28 PM, Srikanteswararao Talluri
><srikanteswararao.talluri@citrix.com> wrote:
>
>> +1
>>
>> Gaurav,
>>
>> You were talking about integrating static code analysis in
>> jenkins.b.a.c.o. How is it going?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> ~Talluri
>>
>> On 14/04/15 3:50 pm, "Sebastien Goasguen" <runseb@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>> On Apr 14, 2015, at 9:06 AM, Gaurav Aradhye
>>>> <gaurav.aradhye@clogeny.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi all,
>>>>
>>>> I feel that the test code in BVT and Regression tests (smoke and
>>>> component folders) should be more consistent. There are feature
>>>> developers adding tests into smoke and different test developers
>>>>adding
>>>> more tests into component folder, it is evident that inconsistencies
>>>>are
>>>> bound to arise. But with time, we should be striving to minimize them.
>>>>
>>>> I have listed few of the inconsistencies below. Feel free to add to
>>>>the
>>>> list if you think of more.
>>>>
>>>> 1. List Methods:
>>>>
>>>> If we want to list accounts, some tests use Account.list method, while
>>>> some use list_accounts method. Both methods finally do the same thing,
>>>> but there are many list methods in common.py file corresponding base
>>>> class methods in base.py. This is code duplication.
>>>>
>>>> I feel that BaseClass.method() is more readable than list_xyz(), or
>>>> should be preferred.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 2. Checking empty/None lists:
>>>>
>>>> We already have validateList utility method which checks both empty
>>>> lists and None objects. No need to use ³isinstance² method, or add
>>>> additional None checks.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 3. Pep8 issues:
>>>> Many files are not pep8 consistent. In the past I have tried to fix
>>>> pep8 issues in files and the mission is ON. Efforts need to be put
>>>>into
>>>> this. We already have autopep8 tool which does most of the things.
>>>>
>>>
>>> +1
>>>
>>> that¹s really a low hanging fruit and best practice. we should not be
>>> merging anything that breaks pep8
>>> we should also add pylint tests
>>>
>>> checking for pep8 and python of all python code can be done at the high
>>> level using something like tox, kind of like the RAT tests
>>>
>>>>
>>>> I will be creating separate issues in JIRA for listed things. Everyone
>>>> is welcome to add pull requests for these tasks.
>>>> I personally will be putting more efforts into these in upcoming few
>>>> months. 2-3 months and we should see most of the tests consistent with
>>>> each other.
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>> Gaurav
>
|