Quantcast

[sonar-dev] [VOTE] Release Sonar Python Plugin 1.0

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
9 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

[sonar-dev] [VOTE] Release Sonar Python Plugin 1.0

Evgeny Mandrikov
Hi all,

I'd like to release Sonar Python Plugin version 1.0.

This plugin enables analysis of Python projects into Sonar.

This version introduces implementation of own Python parser for computation of metrics, adds new metrics, new rules, fixes some bugs and provides default SQALE model.
Should be noted that current version of parser might be incomplete, however it was successfully tested on projects Django, Buildbot, Tornado, GNU Mailman, pylint.

26 issues have been solved
http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/SONARPLUGINS/fixforversion/18636

There are still a couple of issues left

Release early, release often!


--
Best regards,
Evgeny Mandrikov aka Godin <http://godin.net.ru>
http://twitter.com/_godin_
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: [sonar-dev] [VOTE] Release Sonar Python Plugin 1.0

David Racodon-2
Hi Evgeny,

I tested the Python plugin. It works very well and it is impressively fast (without Pylint)
So I'm looking forward to having a big bunch of rules directly through the Sonar engine.

For your information, I randomly picked up the PyFFI library as a test: git clone --recursive git://github.com/amorilia/pyffi.git
I've got a few parsing errors. So feel free to give it a try.
Pylint got stuck at some point. If I run directly the pylint command on this single file, it works fine.
But as Pylint should be removed eventually, I give my +1.

With Waleri's agreement, I slightly updated his samples and move them to our centralized github repository: https://github.com/SonarSource/sonar-examples. I updated the documentation accordingly.

Regards,

David RACODON | SonarSource
Senior Consultant



On 10 July 2012 15:52, Evgeny Mandrikov <[hidden email]> wrote:
Hi all,

I'd like to release Sonar Python Plugin version 1.0.

This plugin enables analysis of Python projects into Sonar.

This version introduces implementation of own Python parser for computation of metrics, adds new metrics, new rules, fixes some bugs and provides default SQALE model.
Should be noted that current version of parser might be incomplete, however it was successfully tested on projects Django, Buildbot, Tornado, GNU Mailman, pylint.

26 issues have been solved
http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/SONARPLUGINS/fixforversion/18636

There are still a couple of issues left

Release early, release often!


--
Best regards,
Evgeny Mandrikov aka Godin <http://godin.net.ru>
http://twitter.com/_godin_

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: [sonar-dev] [VOTE] Release Sonar Python Plugin 1.0

Waleri Enns
In reply to this post by Evgeny Mandrikov
Hi Evgeny,

I just spent some time testing the new version, see my findings below.

* The following syntaxes arent supported by the new parser:
   [x for x in 1, 1]
   (x for x in 1, 1)

   If you wonder what the hell comes after 'in': its a tuple ;)

* The doc-strings count as code, currently. Would be better if we could
count them as comments. Thats not thats simple, though: the
long-string-syntax is also valid code (i.e.: str = """lala"""). Note:
that's not a regression as the 0.1-version had the same problem.

Furthermore, I compared the values of the metrics for the new and the
old versions for the codebases of Mercurial and Trac, just to make sure
there are no regressions. Results:

- The 'lines of code' metric has a bigger diff. One of the factors is
that the new implementation counts the empty lines within the
doc-strings also as code, while the old one doesnt. I woulnt count that
as a regression as actually neither behavior is optimal (see above). But
thats probably not all, there should be other reasons. Should be
investigated further, I guess.

- The 'comments' metric is also quite different. The old version didnt
differentiate between blank and not black comments so I would expect
that
    "comments_old == comments_new + comments_black_new"
Its not the case though. Didnt investigate further where the diff comes
from.

- Complexity: bigger diff, also. One of the reasons is that the new
implementation doesnt consider the code in modules' namespace. And I
have the feeling it gets confused in presence of nested functions.

- Duplications: in case of Trac, there is actually a small regression as
the new version finds one less duplicated blocks and the not found one
seems to be a valid clone.

So there's nothing dramatic.

On the other side, its gotten very fast (it you dont switch on pylint ;)
more complete and provides a good starting point for further
development. Great work, thanks!

+1.

--
Waleri


On 07/10/2012 03:52 PM, Evgeny Mandrikov wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> I'd like to release Sonar Python Plugin version 1.0.
>
> This plugin enables analysis of Python projects into Sonar.
>
> This version introduces implementation of own Python parser for
> computation of metrics, adds new metrics, new rules, fixes some bugs and
> provides default SQALE model.
> Should be noted that current version of parser might be incomplete,
> however it was successfully tested on projects Django, Buildbot,
> Tornado, GNU Mailman, pylint.
>
> *26 issues have been solved*
> http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/SONARPLUGINS/fixforversion/18636
>
> *There are still a couple of issues left*
> http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/SONARPLUGINS/component/15262*
> *
> *
> *
> *Snapshot version*
> sonar-python-plugin-1.0-SNAPSHOT.jar
> <http://repository-sonarplugins.forge.cloudbees.com/snapshot/org/codehaus/sonar-plugins/python/sonar-python-plugin/1.0-SNAPSHOT/sonar-python-plugin-1.0-SNAPSHOT.jar>
>
> *Documentation*
> http://docs.codehaus.org/display/SONAR/Python+Plugin
>
> *Vote** open to everybody for 72 hours.*
> *
> *
> [ ] +1
> [ ] +0
> [ ] -1
>
> *Release early, release often!*
> *
> *
>
> --
> Best regards,
> Evgeny Mandrikov aka Godin <http://godin.net.ru>
> http://twitter.com/_godin_


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this list, please visit:

    http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: [sonar-dev] [VOTE] Release Sonar Python Plugin 1.0

Evgeny Mandrikov
Hi Waleri,

See my comments below :

On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 4:54 AM, Waleri Enns <[hidden email]> wrote:
Hi Evgeny,

I just spent some time testing the new version, see my findings below.

* The following syntaxes arent supported by the new parser:
  [x for x in 1, 1]
  (x for x in 1, 1)

  If you wonder what the hell comes after 'in': its a tuple ;)

I'll take a look on this, but in any case this should come to the next version.
 
* The doc-strings count as code, currently. Would be better if we could
count them as comments. Thats not thats simple, though: the
long-string-syntax is also valid code (i.e.: str = """lala"""). Note: that's not a regression as the 0.1-version had the same problem.

From a syntaxis point of view there is only one type of comments - http://docs.python.org/reference/lexical_analysis.html#comments ;)
But indeed - in next version we should take in account PEP 257 - http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0257/
 
Furthermore, I compared the values of the metrics for the new and the old versions for the codebases of Mercurial and Trac, just to make sure there are no regressions. Results:

- The 'lines of code' metric has a bigger diff.

I'm not surprised about diff. I inclined to say that new version should be more accurate.
 
One of the factors is that the new implementation counts the empty lines within the doc-strings also as code, while the old one doesnt. I woulnt count that as a regression as actually neither behavior is optimal (see above).

This is surprising and I can't believe in this - could you provide small example to demonstrate this?
 
But thats probably not all, there should be other reasons. Should be investigated further, I guess.

- The 'comments' metric is also quite different. The old version didnt
differentiate between blank and not black comments so I would expect
that
   "comments_old == comments_new + comments_black_new"
Its not the case though. Didnt investigate further where the diff comes from.
- Complexity: bigger diff, also. One of the reasons is that the new implementation doesnt consider the code in modules' namespace. And I have the feeling it gets confused in presence of nested functions.

Once again - I believe that any incorrect behaviour should be demonstrated on a small example. 
 
- Duplications: in case of Trac, there is actually a small regression as the new version finds one less duplicated blocks and the not found one seems to be a valid clone.

Detection of duplications isn't precise in general (as a subject). Difference can be explained by the fact that we completely replaced lexer and I trust to the new one more than previous, because precisely know that there was incorrect handling of some tokens in previous. On other side - I'll take a look on what wasn't found in Trac project.
 
So there's nothing dramatic.

On the other side, its gotten very fast (it you dont switch on pylint ;)
more complete and provides a good starting point for further development. Great work, thanks!

+1.

Thanks.
 

--
Waleri



On 07/10/2012 03:52 PM, Evgeny Mandrikov wrote:
Hi all,

I'd like to release Sonar Python Plugin version 1.0.

This plugin enables analysis of Python projects into Sonar.

This version introduces implementation of own Python parser for
computation of metrics, adds new metrics, new rules, fixes some bugs and
provides default SQALE model.
Should be noted that current version of parser might be incomplete,
however it was successfully tested on projects Django, Buildbot,
Tornado, GNU Mailman, pylint.

*26 issues have been solved*
http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/SONARPLUGINS/fixforversion/18636

*There are still a couple of issues left*
http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/SONARPLUGINS/component/15262*
*
*
*
*Snapshot version*
sonar-python-plugin-1.0-SNAPSHOT.jar
<http://repository-sonarplugins.forge.cloudbees.com/snapshot/org/codehaus/sonar-plugins/python/sonar-python-plugin/1.0-SNAPSHOT/sonar-python-plugin-1.0-SNAPSHOT.jar>

*Documentation*
http://docs.codehaus.org/display/SONAR/Python+Plugin

*Vote** open to everybody for 72 hours.*
*
*
[ ] +1
[ ] +0
[ ] -1

*Release early, release often!*
*

*

--
Best regards,
Evgeny Mandrikov aka Godin <http://godin.net.ru>
http://twitter.com/_godin_


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this list, please visit:

   http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email





--
Best regards,
Evgeny Mandrikov aka Godin <http://godin.net.ru>
http://twitter.com/_godin_
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: [sonar-dev] [VOTE] Release Sonar Python Plugin 1.0

Evgeny Mandrikov
In reply to this post by David Racodon-2
Hi David,

Thanks for your feedback. Grammar was fixed and now PyFFI project can be fully parsed : https://github.com/SonarCommunity/sonar-python/commit/947fc6bb6040fbe65ada9757563cffe916b6e6cc

On Wed, Jul 11, 2012 at 10:10 PM, David Racodon <[hidden email]> wrote:
Hi Evgeny,

I tested the Python plugin. It works very well and it is impressively fast (without Pylint)
So I'm looking forward to having a big bunch of rules directly through the Sonar engine.

For your information, I randomly picked up the PyFFI library as a test: git clone --recursive git://github.com/amorilia/pyffi.git
I've got a few parsing errors. So feel free to give it a try.
Pylint got stuck at some point. If I run directly the pylint command on this single file, it works fine.
But as Pylint should be removed eventually, I give my +1.

With Waleri's agreement, I slightly updated his samples and move them to our centralized github repository: https://github.com/SonarSource/sonar-examples. I updated the documentation accordingly.

Regards,

David RACODON | SonarSource
Senior Consultant



On 10 July 2012 15:52, Evgeny Mandrikov <[hidden email]> wrote:
Hi all,

I'd like to release Sonar Python Plugin version 1.0.

This plugin enables analysis of Python projects into Sonar.

This version introduces implementation of own Python parser for computation of metrics, adds new metrics, new rules, fixes some bugs and provides default SQALE model.
Should be noted that current version of parser might be incomplete, however it was successfully tested on projects Django, Buildbot, Tornado, GNU Mailman, pylint.

26 issues have been solved
http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/SONARPLUGINS/fixforversion/18636

There are still a couple of issues left

Release early, release often!


--
Best regards,
Evgeny Mandrikov aka Godin <http://godin.net.ru>
http://twitter.com/_godin_




--
Best regards,
Evgeny Mandrikov aka Godin <http://godin.net.ru>
http://twitter.com/_godin_
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: [sonar-dev] [VOTE] Release Sonar Python Plugin 1.0

Waleri Enns
In reply to this post by Evgeny Mandrikov
On 07/12/2012 07:10 AM, Evgeny Mandrikov wrote:

> Hi Waleri,
>
> See my comments below :
>
> On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 4:54 AM, Waleri Enns <[hidden email]
> <mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote:
>
>     Hi Evgeny,
>
>     I just spent some time testing the new version, see my findings below.
>
>     * The following syntaxes arent supported by the new parser:
>        [x for x in 1, 1]
>        (x for x in 1, 1)
>
>        If you wonder what the hell comes after 'in': its a tuple ;)
>
>
> I'll take a look on this, but in any case this should come to the next
> version.
Of course.

>
>     * The doc-strings count as code, currently. Would be better if we could
>     count them as comments. Thats not thats simple, though: the
>     long-string-syntax is also valid code (i.e.: str = """lala""").
>     Note: that's not a regression as the 0.1-version had the same problem.
>
>
>  From a syntaxis point of view there is only one type of comments -
> http://docs.python.org/reference/lexical_analysis.html#comments ;)
> But indeed - in next version we should take in account PEP 257 -
> http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0257/
Yep.

>
>     Furthermore, I compared the values of the metrics for the new and
>     the old versions for the codebases of Mercurial and Trac, just to
>     make sure there are no regressions. Results:
>
>     - The 'lines of code' metric has a bigger diff.
>
>
> I'm not surprised about diff. I inclined to say that new version should
> be more accurate.
>
>     One of the factors is that the new implementation counts the empty
>     lines within the doc-strings also as code, while the old one doesnt.
>     I woulnt count that as a regression as actually neither behavior is
>     optimal (see above).
>
>
> This is surprising and I can't believe in this - could you provide small
> example to demonstrate this?
>
>     But thats probably not all, there should be other reasons. Should be
>     investigated further, I guess.
>
>     - The 'comments' metric is also quite different. The old version didnt
>     differentiate between blank and not black comments so I would expect
>     that
>     "comments_old == comments_new + comments_black_new"
>     Its not the case though. Didnt investigate further where the diff
>     comes from.
>
>     - Complexity: bigger diff, also. One of the reasons is that the new
>     implementation doesnt consider the code in modules' namespace. And I
>     have the feeling it gets confused in presence of nested functions.
>
> Once again - I believe that any incorrect behaviour should be
> demonstrated on a small example.
To be clear: I too tend to think that the new implementation is more
accurate, at least in the case of lines of code and comments. The above
are just observations and feedback, not regressions. See attached files
for examples which show potential minor issues, which (of course!) arent
blocking this version.

>
>     - Duplications: in case of Trac, there is actually a small
>     regression as the new version finds one less duplicated blocks and
>     the not found one seems to be a valid clone.
>
>
> Detection of duplications isn't precise in general (as a
> subject). Difference can be explained by the fact that we completely
> replaced lexer and I trust to the new one more than previous, because
> precisely know that there was incorrect handling of some tokens in
> previous. On other side - I'll take a look on what wasn't found in Trac
> project.
>
>     So there's nothing dramatic.
>
>     On the other side, its gotten very fast (it you dont switch on pylint ;)
>     more complete and provides a good starting point for further
>     development. Great work, thanks!
>
>     +1.
>
>
> Thanks.
>
>
>     --
>     Waleri
>
>
>
>     On 07/10/2012 03:52 PM, Evgeny Mandrikov wrote:
>
>         Hi all,
>
>         I'd like to release Sonar Python Plugin version 1.0.
>
>         This plugin enables analysis of Python projects into Sonar.
>
>         This version introduces implementation of own Python parser for
>         computation of metrics, adds new metrics, new rules, fixes some
>         bugs and
>         provides default SQALE model.
>         Should be noted that current version of parser might be incomplete,
>         however it was successfully tested on projects Django, Buildbot,
>         Tornado, GNU Mailman, pylint.
>
>         *26 issues have been solved*
>         http://jira.codehaus.org/__browse/SONARPLUGINS/__fixforversion/18636
>         <http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/SONARPLUGINS/fixforversion/18636>
>
>         *There are still a couple of issues left*
>         http://jira.codehaus.org/__browse/SONARPLUGINS/component/__15262* <http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/SONARPLUGINS/component/15262*>
>         *
>         *
>         *
>         *Snapshot version*
>         sonar-python-plugin-1.0-__SNAPSHOT.jar
>         <http://repository-__sonarplugins.forge.cloudbees.__com/snapshot/org/codehaus/__sonar-plugins/python/sonar-__python-plugin/1.0-SNAPSHOT/__sonar-python-plugin-1.0-__SNAPSHOT.jar
>         <http://repository-sonarplugins.forge.cloudbees.com/snapshot/org/codehaus/sonar-plugins/python/sonar-python-plugin/1.0-SNAPSHOT/sonar-python-plugin-1.0-SNAPSHOT.jar>>
>
>         *Documentation*
>         http://docs.codehaus.org/__display/SONAR/Python+Plugin
>         <http://docs.codehaus.org/display/SONAR/Python+Plugin>
>
>         *Vote** open to everybody for 72 hours.*
>         *
>         *
>         [ ] +1
>         [ ] +0
>         [ ] -1
>
>         *Release early, release often!*
>         *
>
>         *
>
>         --
>         Best regards,
>         Evgeny Mandrikov aka Godin <http://godin.net.ru>
>         http://twitter.com/_godin_
>
>
>
>     ------------------------------__------------------------------__---------
>     To unsubscribe from this list, please visit:
>
>     http://xircles.codehaus.org/__manage_email
>     <http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> Best regards,
> Evgeny Mandrikov aka Godin <http://godin.net.ru>
> http://twitter.com/_godin_


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this list, please visit:

    http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email

lines_of_code.py (160 bytes) Download Attachment
complexity.py (257 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: [sonar-dev] [VOTE] Release Sonar Python Plugin 1.0

Evgeny Mandrikov
Waleri, according to your examples :
Feel free to create ticket about complexity.
About lines of code: This is definitely relates to another subject - docstring (PEP 257). Indeed - docstring should not be counted as a line of code in general (feel free to create ticket). But if multiline string is a part of expression (i.e. variable = """value"""), then IMO absolutely clear that all lines included into this string should be counted as lines of code. So since we don't have notion of docstring, current behaviour is correct.

On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 12:57 PM, Waleri Enns <[hidden email]> wrote:
On 07/12/2012 07:10 AM, Evgeny Mandrikov wrote:
Hi Waleri,

See my comments below :

On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 4:54 AM, Waleri Enns <[hidden email]
<mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote:

    Hi Evgeny,

    I just spent some time testing the new version, see my findings below.

    * The following syntaxes arent supported by the new parser:
       [x for x in 1, 1]
       (x for x in 1, 1)

       If you wonder what the hell comes after 'in': its a tuple ;)


I'll take a look on this, but in any case this should come to the next
version.
Of course.



    * The doc-strings count as code, currently. Would be better if we could
    count them as comments. Thats not thats simple, though: the
    long-string-syntax is also valid code (i.e.: str = """lala""").
    Note: that's not a regression as the 0.1-version had the same problem.


 From a syntaxis point of view there is only one type of comments -
http://docs.python.org/reference/lexical_analysis.html#comments ;)
But indeed - in next version we should take in account PEP 257 -
http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0257/
Yep.



    Furthermore, I compared the values of the metrics for the new and
    the old versions for the codebases of Mercurial and Trac, just to
    make sure there are no regressions. Results:

    - The 'lines of code' metric has a bigger diff.


I'm not surprised about diff. I inclined to say that new version should
be more accurate.

    One of the factors is that the new implementation counts the empty
    lines within the doc-strings also as code, while the old one doesnt.
    I woulnt count that as a regression as actually neither behavior is
    optimal (see above).


This is surprising and I can't believe in this - could you provide small
example to demonstrate this?

    But thats probably not all, there should be other reasons. Should be
    investigated further, I guess.

    - The 'comments' metric is also quite different. The old version didnt
    differentiate between blank and not black comments so I would expect
    that
    "comments_old == comments_new + comments_black_new"
    Its not the case though. Didnt investigate further where the diff
    comes from.

    - Complexity: bigger diff, also. One of the reasons is that the new
    implementation doesnt consider the code in modules' namespace. And I
    have the feeling it gets confused in presence of nested functions.

Once again - I believe that any incorrect behaviour should be
demonstrated on a small example.

To be clear: I too tend to think that the new implementation is more accurate, at least in the case of lines of code and comments. The above are just observations and feedback, not regressions. See attached files for examples which show potential minor issues, which (of course!) arent blocking this version.


    - Duplications: in case of Trac, there is actually a small
    regression as the new version finds one less duplicated blocks and
    the not found one seems to be a valid clone.


Detection of duplications isn't precise in general (as a
subject). Difference can be explained by the fact that we completely
replaced lexer and I trust to the new one more than previous, because
precisely know that there was incorrect handling of some tokens in
previous. On other side - I'll take a look on what wasn't found in Trac
project.

    So there's nothing dramatic.

    On the other side, its gotten very fast (it you dont switch on pylint ;)
    more complete and provides a good starting point for further
    development. Great work, thanks!

    +1.


Thanks.


    --
    Waleri



    On 07/10/2012 03:52 PM, Evgeny Mandrikov wrote:

        Hi all,

        I'd like to release Sonar Python Plugin version 1.0.

        This plugin enables analysis of Python projects into Sonar.

        This version introduces implementation of own Python parser for
        computation of metrics, adds new metrics, new rules, fixes some
        bugs and
        provides default SQALE model.
        Should be noted that current version of parser might be incomplete,
        however it was successfully tested on projects Django, Buildbot,
        Tornado, GNU Mailman, pylint.

        *26 issues have been solved*
        http://jira.codehaus.org/__browse/SONARPLUGINS/__fixforversion/18636

        <http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/SONARPLUGINS/fixforversion/18636>

        *There are still a couple of issues left*
        http://jira.codehaus.org/__browse/SONARPLUGINS/component/__15262* <http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/SONARPLUGINS/component/15262*>

        *
        *
        *
        *Snapshot version*
        sonar-python-plugin-1.0-__SNAPSHOT.jar
        <http://repository-__sonarplugins.forge.cloudbees.__com/snapshot/org/codehaus/__sonar-plugins/python/sonar-__python-plugin/1.0-SNAPSHOT/__sonar-python-plugin-1.0-__SNAPSHOT.jar
        <http://repository-sonarplugins.forge.cloudbees.com/snapshot/org/codehaus/sonar-plugins/python/sonar-python-plugin/1.0-SNAPSHOT/sonar-python-plugin-1.0-SNAPSHOT.jar>>

        *Documentation*
        http://docs.codehaus.org/__display/SONAR/Python+Plugin

        <http://docs.codehaus.org/display/SONAR/Python+Plugin>

        *Vote** open to everybody for 72 hours.*
        *
        *
        [ ] +1
        [ ] +0
        [ ] -1

        *Release early, release often!*
        *

        *

        --
        Best regards,
        Evgeny Mandrikov aka Godin <http://godin.net.ru>
        http://twitter.com/_godin_



    ------------------------------__------------------------------__---------

    To unsubscribe from this list, please visit:

    http://xircles.codehaus.org/__manage_email

    <http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email>





--
Best regards,
Evgeny Mandrikov aka Godin <http://godin.net.ru>
http://twitter.com/_godin_



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this list, please visit:

    http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email




--
Best regards,
Evgeny Mandrikov aka Godin <http://godin.net.ru>
http://twitter.com/_godin_
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

[sonar-dev] [RESULT] [VOTE] Release Sonar Python Plugin 1.0

Evgeny Mandrikov
In reply to this post by Evgeny Mandrikov
Hi,

The vote has passed (lazy consensus) with the following result:
+1 : David Racodon, Waleri Enns

Thanks to the voters to help get this out!
Eric, could you please make an actual release?

On Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 7:52 PM, Evgeny Mandrikov <[hidden email]> wrote:
Hi all,

I'd like to release Sonar Python Plugin version 1.0.

This plugin enables analysis of Python projects into Sonar.

This version introduces implementation of own Python parser for computation of metrics, adds new metrics, new rules, fixes some bugs and provides default SQALE model.
Should be noted that current version of parser might be incomplete, however it was successfully tested on projects Django, Buildbot, Tornado, GNU Mailman, pylint.

26 issues have been solved
http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/SONARPLUGINS/fixforversion/18636

There are still a couple of issues left

Release early, release often!


--
Best regards,
Evgeny Mandrikov aka Godin <http://godin.net.ru>
http://twitter.com/_godin_



--
Best regards,
Evgeny Mandrikov aka Godin <http://godin.net.ru>
http://twitter.com/_godin_
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

[sonar-dev] Re: [RESULT] [VOTE] Release Sonar Python Plugin 1.0

ehartmann
Administrator
Hi,

The release has been done !

Eric


On 13 July 2012 12:18, Evgeny Mandrikov <[hidden email]> wrote:
Hi,

The vote has passed (lazy consensus) with the following result:
+1 : David Racodon, Waleri Enns

Thanks to the voters to help get this out!
Eric, could you please make an actual release?

On Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 7:52 PM, Evgeny Mandrikov <[hidden email]> wrote:
Hi all,

I'd like to release Sonar Python Plugin version 1.0.

This plugin enables analysis of Python projects into Sonar.

This version introduces implementation of own Python parser for computation of metrics, adds new metrics, new rules, fixes some bugs and provides default SQALE model.
Should be noted that current version of parser might be incomplete, however it was successfully tested on projects Django, Buildbot, Tornado, GNU Mailman, pylint.

26 issues have been solved
http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/SONARPLUGINS/fixforversion/18636

There are still a couple of issues left

Release early, release often!


--
Best regards,
Evgeny Mandrikov aka Godin <http://godin.net.ru>
http://twitter.com/_godin_



--
Best regards,
Evgeny Mandrikov aka Godin <http://godin.net.ru>
http://twitter.com/_godin_

Loading...