Open
Conversation
Contributor
|
Thank you for your contribution indorilftw. As this is quite a big patch, it will take some time to be reviewed. |
Contributor
Author
|
@Erethon rebase completed. |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
3 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
I tried to keep commits short and organized, so you can cherry-pick the ones you want, if you disagree with some. I haven't tackled the following two suggestions:
./snf-common/synnefo/lib/dictconfig.py:253:83: E721 do not compare types, use 'isinstance()'
./snf-common/synnefo/lib/dictconfig.py:473:87: E721 do not compare types, use 'isinstance()'
because I was unsure of the correct "classinfo" to be used.
I also noticed that you use wrapping on columns 80 and 120 on different files.
Is there any reasoning behind the distinction or it's just code before a style change?