Code review comment for lp:~benji/charm-tools/prooflib

Revision history for this message
Marco Ceppi (marcoceppi) wrote :

These changes look fine, I'm not sure if .lbox is configured properly or
not. Could you review?

https://codereview.appspot.com/36190043/diff/20001/.lbox
File .lbox (right):

https://codereview.appspot.com/36190043/diff/20001/.lbox#newcode1
.lbox:1: propose -cr -for lp:charmtools
On 2013/12/03 14:40:01, benji wrote:
> Set the default options for "lbox propose".

lp:charm-tools

https://codereview.appspot.com/36190043/diff/20001/charmtools/subscribers.py
File charmtools/subscribers.py (left):

https://codereview.appspot.com/36190043/diff/20001/charmtools/subscribers.py#oldcode126
charmtools/subscribers.py:126: charm =
charmdistro.getSourcePackage(name=charm_name)
On 2013/12/03 14:40:01, benji wrote:
> So... the linter complained that "charm" was assigned a value but
never used,
> which is true. Looking at the code I saw that "charm_name" was
appended to the
> list "charms" so I figured s/charm_name/charm/ was the right thing to
do, so I
> did it and ran the tests. None failed. I ran "make check" and some
failed. I
> changed the code back and "make check" still failed. I ran "make
check" on
> lp:charm-tools/1.2 and it failed in the same way there.

> I looked at the other code and despite the list being named "charms",
charm
> names are appended to it below, so I really don't know what to do
here.

> Therefore, just removed the assignment to make the linter happy and
left it for
> you to figure out. :)

Yeah, I didn't write this :) I'll go over it post merge and review what
it's trying to do.

https://codereview.appspot.com/36190043/

« Back to merge proposal