added pylint config for linting Python code

[alexvoss]

These are the changes that would be needed to integrate pylint as suggested in #6472

I accidentally also added a bump of ESLint to version 6.13.1. I saw dependabot suggest this but the PR being rejected, so perhaps there is a reason why this is not a good idea (yet). What prompted me to bump this was that I got deprecation warnings with the older version, complaining that the newer version of Typescript being used was unsupported.

[alexvoss]

On the choice of Pylint: it says about itself that it is "not afraid of being a little slower than it already is, [it] is also a lot more thorough than other linters. There are more checks, including some opinionated ones that are deactivated by default but can be enabled using configuration." It also suggests to use other linters alongside it, which I think is just sensible.

Especially people who have a slower machine may well want to use in ruff in their IDE. I would still run Pylint in the delivery pipeline. So, not so much a question of either or.

The changes needed here are tiny and the impact should be tangible, though I agree that they benefit end users only indirectly.

Btw. I will take the ESLint bump out again because it seems to have triggered a deprecation warning (see failed check in the pipeline) and so probably best to deal with it separately.

[squidfunk]

Yeah, I need to update the linters, there are some pinned dependencies because some rules have been phased out. Looks a little like moving forward for the sake of moving forward, so I considered this to be a low priority. As said, linting is good, but it is certainly not the most important thing we should be working on. Let me finish the projects plugin rewrite, and then let's have a call to discuss how we can start integrating linting and maybe auto-formatting gradually.

[alexvoss]

moving forward for the sake of moving forward

I think it is more than that. We have just documented PRs and IMHO as part of that we should a) describe the linters already in use and b) add a Python one since there is a fair bit of Python code.

Other things may be more pressing right now but I think we should do this pretty soon since it will pay you back every day once done, especially if we get more PRs as a result of having explained the process - unless the documentation has the opposite effect or putting people off. (I hope it has the effect of encouraging quality PRs while preventing some of the low quality ones.)

[squidfunk]

With "moving foward for the sake of moving forward" I meant that specific rules have been removed from Stylelint and ESLint, which is why I had to pin these dependencies.

I absolutely agree on improving the environment for outside collaborators. However, since I'm currently doing 99% of changes on the code base, introducing new processes must be done carefully, as I'm the one that is most impacted by those changes. Since I'm currently super busy pushing this project forward, adding new tooling to the build chain is something I'll be very, very selective about. Once the dust settles around search and the projects plugin, we can definitely consider moving forward here. Until then, it is not a priority. The toolchain currently works very well, and yes, we need to improve it, but please let's push this a little into the future. I suggest mid to end of Q1 2024. I hope that's okay for you.

As a corollary: I also wouldn't get a new notebook 1 day before an important presentation.

[squidfunk]

We're currently not considering this change, but we're planning to do a major restructuring of our Python code base later this year or next year (depending on how much other things are on my/our plate). Let's close it for now, and then reconsider. I've created a memo in the backlog of our internal project board.