> > Recently, we've had a bugs > http://gerrit.ovirt.org/#/c/24242/ > that could have been avoided had we used pylint to check our code before > its usage. Two other bugs-in-waiting can be quickly removed > http://gerrit.ovirt.org/#/c/24313/ > http://gerrit.ovirt.org/#/c/24412/ > > I would like to suggest > http://gerrit.ovirt.org/#/c/24382/ > "make check: add a pylint check" > > We have a long way to go before pylint is happy with our code, but I > believe that pylinting some of our modules is a good start. > > The down sides are many: it's slow, it's another dependency, it has > false negatives, and I do not yet understand how it behaves > (particularly, the interdependency between checked modules). > > What do you think? Should we add it? +1 My take: I am for it, or at very least to give it a try, following the path you suggested. I use pylint in a few other projects and it saved me from some bugs and led to improvements. IMO it is worth its price.