After the meeting earlier today, I wanted to make a slightly
- if flake8 config in arcanist can be so configured, set max line
width to 120 instead of 79
On my 1920px monitor, two windows with 100 columns fit perfectly next to each other (11px
font). Is there a strong desire to go over 100 cols? It would make file comparisons less
practical. And 100 (well, 99) is still PEP8-approved.
I have no problems exceeding that limit in certain specific cases. For example, because we
often bundle documentation with the source code, and we format it with rst, it might
happen that a large block of text is indented far right and it makes it very long. Or
there are some code samples which can be wrapped but it makes them hard to read. In such
cases I have no problem having these particular lines go to 120 (or even more, if needed).
But this would be very exceptional and almost never applied to regular code - no need to
worry about linter exceptions discussions, I think.
PS: It seems that flake8 can't be configured in arcanist at the moment. The patch was
written  but abandoned and never pushed . It seems quite simple, though, so we could
finish that up, if desired. The other approach is to disable line length checking in
flake8 and use generic ArcanistTextLinter  for it, it's even mentioned in the docs
. That should be less work.
- default to "no" on lint exceptions - the idea is to avoid spending
time debating whether an exception is worth it or not.
If I read this correctly as "we don't have a strict 0-exceptions policy, but they
should be very rare and if you propose one, you should have a very good reason to do
so", I think that's fine and we'll see how that works in the next months.
- until we get the codebase compliant "if you touch a file, fix the
lint errors even if those errors are not part of what you're
Even though this will make our files a bit consistent (modified parts looking a bit
different than unmodified parts), I don't mind much and I think that this approach is
fine for the moment. Especially before we find out if we're happy with the new
approach. It will also minimize the changes between develop and disposable-develop.