Skip to content
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.

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

avocado.utils: use default pylintrc configuration from avocado-static-checks #6034

Open
clebergnu opened this issue Sep 24, 2024 · 1 comment · May be fixed by #6114
Open

avocado.utils: use default pylintrc configuration from avocado-static-checks #6034

clebergnu opened this issue Sep 24, 2024 · 1 comment · May be fixed by #6114
Assignees

Comments

@clebergnu
Copy link
Contributor

Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.
Avocado currently uses avocado-static-checks, but for the lint checks use a custom configuration which is much more lax (has many more exceptions).

The autils project has a much more strict configuration file, which is the standard configuraiton supplied by avocado-static-checks.

Describe the solution you'd like
Copying an avocado.utils into autils should not produce any lint errors.

@clebergnu clebergnu added this to the 108 - Codename TBD milestone Sep 24, 2024
@mr-avocado mr-avocado bot moved this to Triage in Default project Sep 24, 2024
@clebergnu clebergnu self-assigned this Oct 2, 2024
@clebergnu
Copy link
Contributor Author

@clebergnu clebergnu removed their assignment Jan 20, 2025
@richtja richtja moved this from In progress to Short Term (Current Q) Backlog in Default project Jan 20, 2025
@richtja richtja self-assigned this Jan 27, 2025
@richtja richtja moved this from Short Term (Current Q) Backlog to In progress in Default project Jan 27, 2025
@richtja richtja linked a pull request Feb 7, 2025 that will close this issue
@richtja richtja linked a pull request Feb 7, 2025 that will close this issue
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
Status: In progress
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

3 participants