BearCollector collects all bears by default about coala HOT 10 CLOSED

@smfn3321 what do yo uthing?

from coala.

@cw1 your opinion would help too, if you need any context, feel free to mail me

from coala.

By the way this is the reason for the weird coverage in #124. What happened was: every python file lying in the coala directory got imported. Since the setup.py and TestHelper are not on any ignore list for coverage (since they never get executed with coverage) their coverage gets measured by only importing them. (And thats a bad coverage since not even the main method gets executed but module code only.)

from coala.

this will be fixed with https://github.com/sils1297/coala/pull/126

from coala.

I like to prefer your first point (an empty coafile doesn't do anything).
If the user want to costumize his coala test suite he has to adjust the config. Maybe we could distribute an example coafile where every option is commented out or set to empty (and explained with comments of course)

from coala.

created #136

So we agree that it never makes sense to use all bears because there is probably no file where all of them are applicable?

from coala.

No, because all bears is not system wide but can still be defined by the use of the bear directorie parameters.

For me this seems preferable because otherwise it will be hard to select a large amount oft
bears if they are wanted.

Also Please note that we can ignore bears, which is helpful if all bears could be taken, but useless if every bear to be used has to be listed on its own.

from coala.

In the typical usecase you don't want to care about the beardirectories. You want to use the bears shipped with coala so this directory is available by default.

I'd group large amounts of bears, e.g. you can import all bears for PEP8 python into a PEP8.py so it looks like

from coala.bears import PythonSpacingBear
from coala.bears import PythonIndentationBear
# and so on

then when we collect this file we'd automatically import all these bears and have a natural, pythonic, way of grouping bears.

I think we should ignore bear ignoration, if this is rendered useless by this action then its even better because it reduces complexity for the user.

from coala.

"In the typical usecase you don't want to care about the beardirectories"

If this is your point of view, I guess we might as well change the user interaction in a couple of ways. We really should talk about this in person, but right now I think of:

• removing bear directory management completely
• specifying custom bears by path/file
• introducing meta-bears that can be handled like normal bears but actually import a group of bears.

from coala.

This is already discussed and merged.

from coala.