build(pylint-odoo): bump for v16 #198
Conversation
|
Test are failing, (or are cancelled). could you check ? |
Fixes the problem explained in OCA/report-print-send#328 (comment).
|
El mar, 30 de may de 2023 a las 01:50:06 AM, Sylvain LE GAL
***@***.***> escribió:
Test are failing, (or are cancelled). could you check ?
Let's see now.
|
|
Can we do that major version bump of pylint-odoo without risk? Are there not some checks that are removed from pylint-odoo 8 and moved to another project (https://github.com/OCA/odoo-pre-commit-hooks/)? |
|
@moylop260 told me to do it, and he maintains the project, so I guess he knows what he says 😉 But well, friend could you please answer @sbidoul's doubt? Thanks! |
|
This PR has the |
|
Amy news? |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Waiting for @moylop260 answer, regarding @sbidoul remark that is legit.
|
@moylop260 can you check? |
|
pylint-odoo >= 8.0 includes OCA/pylint-odoo#396 which drops a lot of checks that have been 'migrated to https://github.com/OCA/odoo-pre-commit-hooks'. I can't find where this new linter is added to the OCA config. Do you have any idea? |
|
@StefanRijnhart these new checks are not in this template yet AFAIK. If we bump pylint-odoo to >=8, we need to add odoo-pre-commit-hooks to our .precommit-config.yaml, but we may also need to configure it to make sure we don't add new checks that would make existing branches red. |
|
Tests fail because we lost support for Python 2.7
|
|
Added. |
|
Any news? i d like to implement OCA/report-print-send#328 |
|
Can we provide any assistance to make it merged? |
|
I think we want to be reasonably sure that no new checks are added. In my imagination, that implies checking out a large number of OCA repos locally, apply this change and run the pre-commit to get an idea of the impact. Let me see if I can get oca-clone-everything working again. |
|
I ran this new pre-commit on all 16.0 OCA branches and I did not spot a large number of issues raised by it. In my comment above I suggested to adjust the indentation in the jinja template but I noticed that the template still leaves an empty line in the yaml configuration file that pre-commit will want to clean up anyway. That makes me less interested in fixing the indentation. If anybody wants to double check, here is the output of the pre-commit run: |
Co-authored-by: Stefan Rijnhart (Opener) <stefan@opener.am>
|
FWIW you don't have to be so much afraid of deploying changes to the template. Remember: it's not like in the old days. Repo per repo, branch per branch, once the template is updated, if anything is violating a new linter, it will raise a ❌. It's not like we're deploying a massive change by merging this. |
|
Is the CI failing something expected? |
|
@yajo Well, I liked to have this confirmed before I took the responsability and approved this change. @pedrobaeza Yes, Python 2.7 is gone. An attempt to revive it is #199. |
|
But seems to be not enough. Should we disable such CI? |
|
I have removed the requirement for py2.7 job to allow unblocking this situation until properly fixed. |
|
tests ok, i guess should be merged, correct ? |
|
It seems the test is still red. |
The First test Is Red because there Is not support Fort python 2.7, i Guess It Is ok |
|
@pedrobaeza Appreciating that there is already an initiative to get this test green again I think keeping it in its current red state is fine. |
|
I understood that @yajo remove such red. Should we merge with the red condition then? |
|
@yajo removed the |
|
OK, I merge then. |
|
I removed the python 2.7 from the requirements to merge PRs, that's why you were able to merge 😉 |
|
Hello, |
|
Updated report-print-send template |
Fixes the problem explained in OCA/report-print-send#328 (comment).