There are some assorted tests in the individual modules, but they were written for testing by relative import so they may not function as a package. Consider "decent test suite" a roadmap objective.
Can you point me to a good discussion of the AGPL's shortcomings? Nobody say "it's viral!", I know and that's exactly the point.
Hashbang is silly but not a bug. Where's the easy install bug? I copied all that boilerplate. Plus, I don't even use easy-install ;)
Will go look at the style suggesters. If they reference strunck and white (as does PEP8), I'm blaming you!
Bryan Bishop <kanzure@gmail.com> wrote:
On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 7:26 AM, Cathal Garvey wrote:I'm emailing this all here to ask for feedback; PySplicer was written
for my own use, and I'm planning to put it to use ASAP. But if anyone
Complaints:
* No tests. That should be fixed, especially if you plan on your work
being verifiable multiple months into the future. I believe biopython
has a good test suite that you can go look at (and if not, just use
python-requests' tests as a gold standard).
* AGPL. No thanks.. too many problems with that license.
* You have a hash-bang in setup.py, but nobody ever marks their
setup.py as executable so I'm not sure why you would do that..
* easy_install is usually easy_install and not easy-install
* There's a bunch of lowercase class names.. should you want to be
really truly pedantic, then use pylint or pyflakes. Ultimate pedantry
achieved.
- Bryan
http://heybryan.org/
1 512 203 0507
--
Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
0 comments:
Post a Comment