Add support for prospector. #21
Conversation
|
Yeah, add some tests and make sure the readme is correct and I can merge this in |
|
Oh and dont forget to add yourself to the AUTHORS file! |
|
@faulkner you still there. Are you planning on adding a test or two to this so I can merge? |
|
Sorry, I've been busier than usual recently, but I'll try to get to this soon. |
faulkner
force-pushed
the
prospector
branch
2 times, most recently
from
0ab9e9b
to
4d84f45
Compare
|
@Bachmann1234 looks like prospector requires python 2.7 or higher, so this shouldn't be merged in if you're trying to support 2.6. |
|
Oh jeez. I had not realized. Yeah, for now I wanna keep python 2.6 support. Sorry about that... However, I will keep this in the back of my head. I have been thinking diff-quality needs a plugin system so new quality tools can be created separately. Ill close this for now but if I manage to find some time to make the plugins work ill poke you. For now it should be fairly easy for you to work from a fork. |
|
I don't see how adding support for prospector breaks python 2.6 support. If you are running dif-cover from python 2.6, then simply prospector should not be possible to use as the violation tool and the user has to pick a different one. |
|
@dtheodor fair enough. We could do if checks checking the python version. But really i'd like to get away from embedding more and more tools into the project anyway. Especially ones that only work with some of the supported python versions. Like I say above the real solution is proper plugins. But its also the harder solution. I can't promise a timeline. Life and all. But PRs welcome if anyone wants to rush that solution. |
|
Agree, the real solution is hard work. Let's go for the extremely easy one: place the prospector import inside a version check, and voila! |
|
Well... give me some time to try the hard thing. If we keep doing the easy thing the hard thing will never get done. Lets say a month. If I dont add plugin support in a month ill put in the if statements and work with @faulkner here to get this merged. |
|
Could be sooner than that. It really should not be a months worth of work... its mostly about finding free time to learn about and do it |
|
In case this is being watched. I started work on this. Its taking a fair amount of refactoring but ill update when I have more |
|
👀 |
|
Work in progress here: #30 I have basically had to rework large portions of diff-quality. But getting closer. |
See https://pypi.python.org/pypi/prospector
It's a fairly minimal change since I'm abusing the fact that prospector supports pylint as an output format.
I can add unit tests if you'd like this merged in.