-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 147
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
simplify ruff exclude list #1056
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I am debating about merging this. In one hand it is less lines of code.
However, I had to read ruff's documentation to understand why you used extend-exclude
instead of exclude
. So I think extending the defaults from ruff is clever but harder to maintain. I will let @mtreinish weight in
Pull Request Test Coverage Report for Build 7563110066
💛 - Coveralls |
I'm very sympathetic to this argument, i totally see where you're coming from. That said, I note the following from the ruff docs on the 'exclude' config:
The items in the default |
Personally I'm fine either way, my preference is along with Ivan's to be explicit in the config on all the paths to exclude because I don't know off the top of my head what ruff is excluding by default (I didn't even realize there were default exclude paths). But at the end of the day were talking about a super minor difference in the configuration and both are doing the right thing. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think it is fine to merge given we don’t change the list much
If ruff breaks us in the future this was the culprit
No description provided.