Exclude packages that have state set to absent.
#409
Conversation
Signed-off-by: Robert de Bock <robert@meinit.nl>
| # Exclude tasks where state is `absent`. | ||
| if task['action'].get('state') not in self._module_ignore_states: | ||
| message = '{0} {1}' | ||
| return message.format(self.shortdesc, module) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
How about
| return message.format(self.shortdesc, module) | |
| return ' '.join((self.shortdesc, module)) |
| # Exclude tasks where state is `absent`. | ||
| if task['action'].get('state') not in self._module_ignore_states: | ||
| message = '{0} {1}' | ||
| return message.format(self.shortdesc, module) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Oh, the return value should be bool. It's strongly discouraged to mix different return types in a function.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
For better or worse, currently ansible-lint rules use mixed return types, returning True ansible-lint cli outputs the shortdesc field, returning text ansible-lint cli outputs the text. In this case True might be descriptive enough for this rule.
| # '/__|dpkg|_repo|_facts|_sub|_chan/{next} {split($NF, words, "."); | ||
| # print "\""words[1]"\","}' | ||
| package_modules = [ | ||
| _package_modules = [ |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Why do you think this change is related to the PR purpose? I'd not want to see non-related changes making PR non-atomic and addressing multiple things.
| if module in self._package_modules: | ||
| if 'until' not in task: | ||
| # Exclude tasks where state is `absent`. | ||
| if task['action'].get('state') not in self._module_ignore_states: |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It's 3 nesting levels. Better use "guard expressions" style to keep it flat.
| return (task['action']['__ansible_module__'] in self.package_modules | ||
| and 'until' not in task) | ||
| module = task["action"]["__ansible_module__"] | ||
| if module in self._package_modules: |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| if module in self._package_modules: | |
| if module not in self._package_modules or 'until' in task: | |
| return False |
will help keep 2 indentation levels less and will hugely improve readability.
| if module in self._package_modules: | ||
| if 'until' not in task: | ||
| # Exclude tasks where state is `absent`. | ||
| if task['action'].get('state') not in self._module_ignore_states: |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This will collapse to
| if task['action'].get('state') not in self._module_ignore_states: | |
| return task['action'].get('state') not in self._module_ignore_states |
after the suggestions above.
| return (task['action']['__ansible_module__'] in self.package_modules | ||
| and 'until' not in task) | ||
| module = task["action"]["__ansible_module__"] | ||
| if module in self._package_modules: |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Another approach to improve readability would be to have "named conditions":
| if module in self._package_modules: | |
| is_module_package = module in self._package_modules | |
| is_task_retryable = 'until' in task | |
| is_state_whitelisted = task['action'].get('state') in self._module_ignore_states | |
| return is_module_package and not is_task_retryable and is_state_whitelisted |
Flat and simple.
|
I think these are good edits and we should get them in for 4.0.0. I agree with the indenting suggestions. |
|
Merging this as-is, I’ll address the suggestions in a separate PR. Thanks for the contribution @robertdebock! |
3 participants
Signed-off-by: Robert de Bock robert@meinit.nl
This PR solved #405 by excluding tasks that have
stateset toabsent. Tests are included in pass locally usingtox.