Replace Paver quality and js_test commands #35159

salman2013 · 2024-07-23T08:55:57Z

Paver is deprecated, and we aim to fully remove it soon. You can find more details here:

Paver deprecation issue
Paver removal PR

A few Paver commands remain in the edx-platform, and to proceed with its removal, we've replaced the following Paver commands with equivalent Make commands:

Replaced paver run_pep8 with pycodestyle
Replaced paver run_eslint
Replaced paver run_stylelint
Replaced paver run_xsslint
Replaced paver run_pii_check
Replaced paver check_keywords
Replaced paver test_js* and paver diff_coverage

How to Test This PR:

In the edx-platform directory, you can use the following terminal commands to check for linting issues in Python and JavaScript files. Make sure your virtual environment is activated before running these commands.

make pycodestyle
make eslint
make stylelint
make xsslint
make pi_check
make check_keyword
make test-js
make test-coverage
make quality-test

For more details, please refer to the ticket: Replace paver quality and js_test commands

salman2013 · 2024-07-23T11:30:30Z

@feanil @kdmccormick
Should we remove the paver tests as well like https://github.com/openedx/edx-platform/tree/master/pavelib/paver_tests?

kdmccormick · 2024-07-23T14:10:18Z

@salman2013 as you remove Paver commands, please remove the tests that correspond to those commands.

kdmccormick · 2024-07-24T14:09:15Z

Thanks for the PR @salman2013, but this only goes part of the way. The goal of #35159 is not only to get rid of the paver ... commands. The goal is get rid of all the Python code that runs our quality checks. In the end, we should be able to delete the whole pavelib directory.

Keep in mind that there are several things that pavelib code did that are now completely unnecessary, for example:

junit.xml -- I don't know if we need to write this file any more. If nothing is obviously using it, it can be deleted.
violation counts -- There was a time when all checks had "violation limits", so we would need to keep track of the violation count, and then fail only if the count exceeded the limit. For many checks, the violation limit is now zero. If the violation limit for a check is zero, then that check can be simplified, since any violation is enough to fail it.

I recommend starting with one simple check, such as pycodestyle, and see if you can get that running without any Python scripts involved.

salman2013 · 2024-08-05T11:46:36Z

@kdmccormick Could you please look into my comment #34845 (comment)

kdmccormick

Just "Requesting Changes" so this doesn't show up in my queue. The direction is looking great-- just re-request my review whenever you're ready Salman.

salman2013 · 2024-08-21T05:50:35Z

@kdmccormick This PR is ready for another pass. Please take a look thanks.

kdmccormick

Fantastic work so far. Really happy to see these running without Paver.

scripts/generic-ci-tests.sh

pavelib/prereqs.py

pavelib/utils/envs.py

pavelib/paver_tests/test_assets.py

scripts/quality_test/js_test.py

scripts/quality_test/suites/suite.py

scripts/quality_test/utils/envs.py

stylelint.config.js

Makefile

salman2013 · 2024-08-27T07:18:43Z

@kdmccormick I believe this PR is ready for another pass. Please take a look thanks.

kdmccormick

Most of this feedback is straightforward, except the very last item regarding subprocess.run. I'm happy to go over that in our sync tomorrow morning if my comment isn't clear.

Makefile

pavelib/utils/envs.py

Makefile

scripts/quality_test/quality_test.py

salman2013 · 2024-09-12T10:47:04Z

@kdmccormick Thanks for reviewing the PR, I have fixed all your comments, and the PR is ready for another pass.

kdmccormick · 2024-10-24T16:52:14Z

Taking another look...

kdmccormick

Here's a partial review-- I'll have some more comments tomorrow, and I still need to run each check locally. But generally this is looking good and it's exciting to see how much you were able to delete.

Makefile

kdmccormick · 2024-12-03T16:37:12Z

While testing this PR, I found an existing logging issue with our JS CI, and I made a fix that is ready for review: #35954

Once that merges, could you rebase on top of it (or merge it in) so that we have better JS test logging to work with?

salman2013 · 2024-12-04T11:51:11Z

@kdmccormick I have rebased this branch with #35954

salman2013 · 2024-12-04T18:45:13Z

@kdmccormick I have fixed the comments. Could you take another look thanks.

kdmccormick

Also see https://github.com/openedx/edx-platform/pull/35159/files#r1870245413

kdmccormick · 2024-12-04T20:39:45Z

scripts/eslint.py

+def fail_quality(name, message):
+    """
+    Fail the specified quality check.
+    """
+    print(name)
+    print(message)
+    sys.exit()


As written, this displays the word "FAILURE" but it not actually cause the quality check to fail. That is problem... you can check the CI logs on this PR, and see how we are violating the threshold but still getting a green build:

(separate comment: looks like the violations limit needs to be 1303 rather than 1213)

Are you familiar with the idea of exit codes? It is a universal convention where each process in a system returns an integer upon completion. Zero indicates success, nonzero indicates failure. That is how GitHub Actions and many other systems determine whether a process succeeded or not. When you raise a Python exception, that automatically causes the process to return a nonzero exit code.

Here, sys.exit() returns exit code 0, indicating success. Obviously, that is not what we want :) You want to raise exit code 1, indicating "general error" to the surrounding process, which will cause the PR check to fail as desired.

kdmccormick · 2024-12-05T13:18:24Z

scripts/eslint.py

+        "--ext", ".js",
+        "--ext", ".jsx",
+        "--format=compact",
+        "."


@salman2013

Suggested change

"."

"lms",

"cms",

"common",

"openedx",

"xmodule",

I haven't tested it yet, but perhaps specifying each root path would lower the violation count. Specifying "." (current directory) might be including node_modules accidentally.

@kdmccormick I believe your thoughts are right, making these changes the error count reduced to 1285 from 1303.

kdmccormick · 2024-12-06T15:19:04Z

scripts/eslint.py

+    result = subprocess.run(
+        command,
+        text=True,
+        check=False,


Suggested change

check=False,

check=True,

Using check=True ensures that the script will fail if subprocess.run fails. Using check=False hides the errors-- in other words, check=False means "fail silently".

Failing silently is usually bad. In CI scripting, failing silently is very bad, because it means that PRs can pass tests even when they shouldn't.

@salman2013 , every time you call subprocess.run, including here, please please use check=True unless you are actively handling the error case yourself.

@kdmccormick
You are right, actually, i intentionally used check=False, Reason is that check-True command is failing with status code 1. I tried to figure out the reason, there could be the following three possibility

Command Syntax

Eslint Configuration issue

Files path issue

The above three issues were not the reasons i investigated. The result.stderr is showing nothing but the result.stdout is printing almost 1285 errors from different files. Which i figured out the command is sending status code 1 as a lot of errors in different files.

As we raise exceptions in case of violation count comparison, I thought it safe to use check=False.

Ahh I see @salman2013 . You are right, it makes sense to check=False here. Just please then inspect the actual integer value of the exit code. According to the eslint docs, exit code 1 indicates that linting happened successfully but there were violations, whereas exit code 2 indicates that an unexpected error occurred (in which case we'd want to fail CI).

scripts/eslint.py

scripts/xsslint/xsslint/main.py

kdmccormick

I used these PRs to confirm that each kind of build failure is caught by the check as we'd expect. Great work!

Just one comment about raising the pii_check threshold, and there is my comment from earlier about xsslint exit codes 1 vs 2. With those comments resolved, feel free to merge 🚀

Nitpick: Can you label this commit as build: rather than chore:? "chore" is meant to indicate minor, repetitive tasks like routine requirement upgrades. This PR is an overhaul of the quality and JS build suite, much more ambitious than a chore 😄

kdmccormick · 2024-12-10T15:40:44Z

.pii_annotations.yml

@@ -1,7 +1,7 @@
 source_path: ./
 report_path: pii_report
 safelist_path: .annotation_safe_list.yml
-coverage_target: 94.5


PII annotation coverage has improved even further since my last review! Can you bump this up to 85.3?

kdmccormick · 2024-12-10T16:18:51Z

scripts/eslint.py

@@ -0,0 +1,73 @@
+"""  # pylint: disable=django-not-configured
+Check code quality using pycodestyle, pylint, and diff_quality.


Please update this comment before merging.

feanil · 2024-12-11T14:37:41Z

🎉 Congrats, this has been a lot of work!

edx-pipeline-bot · 2024-12-11T15:29:06Z

2U Release Notice: This PR has been deployed to the edX staging environment in preparation for a release to production.

edx-pipeline-bot · 2024-12-11T16:25:41Z

2U Release Notice: This PR has been deployed to the edX production environment.

edx-pipeline-bot · 2024-12-11T16:25:41Z

2U Release Notice: This PR has been deployed to the edX production environment.

Background: We have a large number of standing eslint violations in our legacy frontends. Rather than fixing or amnesty-ing all of them, we've opted to use a simple integer limit of violations. Exceeding this limit causes the quality check to fail. Before we moved eslint off of Paver [1], the limit was unreasonably high (probably due to deprecations that removed violation-rich frontend code). This was good, except for the fact that we essentially weren't catching when new violations creeped into the JS code. So, in [1], we lowered the limit down to the lowest possible value, which we thought was 1285. However, we've found that this made the check flaky-- turned out, we have been unintentionally double-counting various violations due to the symlinks in edx-platform. Some of those symlinks' existence is dependent on whether and how `npm ci` and `npm run build` have been run. As a result, 1285 would pass in some contexts, and fail in other contexts. The fix is to simply add all the relevant edx-platform symlinks to .eslintignore. This allows us to lower the violations limit to 734. [1] openedx#35159

edx-pipeline-bot · 2024-12-11T16:44:37Z

2U Release Notice: This PR has been deployed to the edX staging environment in preparation for a release to production.

Background: We have a large number of standing eslint violations in our legacy frontends. Rather than fixing or amnesty-ing all of them, we've opted to use a simple integer limit of violations. Exceeding this limit causes the quality check to fail. Before we moved eslint off of Paver [1], the limit was unreasonably high (probably due to deprecations that removed violation-rich frontend code). This was good, except for the fact that we essentially weren't catching when new violations creeped into the JS code. So, in [1], we lowered the limit down to the lowest possible value, which we thought was 1285. However, we've found that this made the check flaky-- turned out, we have been unintentionally double-counting various violations due to the symlinks in edx-platform. Some of those symlinks' existence is dependent on whether and how `npm ci` and `npm run build` have been run. As a result, 1285 would pass in some contexts, and fail in other contexts. The fix is to simply add all the relevant edx-platform symlinks to .eslintignore. This allows us to lower the violations limit to 734. [1] openedx#35159

edx-pipeline-bot · 2024-12-11T17:01:46Z

2U Release Notice: This PR has been deployed to the edX production environment.

edx-pipeline-bot · 2024-12-11T17:01:46Z

2U Release Notice: This PR has been deployed to the edX production environment.

Background: We have a large number of standing eslint violations in our legacy frontends. Rather than fixing or amnesty-ing all of them, we've opted to use a simple integer limit of violations. Exceeding this limit causes the quality check to fail. Before we moved eslint off of Paver [1], the limit was unreasonably high (probably due to deprecations that removed violation-rich frontend code). This was good, except for the fact that we essentially weren't catching when new violations creeped into the JS code. So, in [1], we lowered the limit down to the lowest possible value, which we thought was 1285. However, we've found that this made the check flaky-- turned out, we have been unintentionally double-counting various violations due to the symlinks in edx-platform. Some of those symlinks' existence is dependent on whether and how `npm ci` and `npm run build` have been run. As a result, 1285 would pass in some contexts, and fail in other contexts. The fix is to simply add all the relevant edx-platform symlinks to .eslintignore. This allows us to lower the violations limit to 734. [1] #35159

openedx-webhooks added the open-source-contribution PR author is not from Axim or 2U label Jul 23, 2024

This comment was marked as outdated.

Sign in to view

salman2013 requested a review from kdmccormick July 23, 2024 11:20

salman2013 marked this pull request as ready for review July 23, 2024 11:21

salman2013 requested a review from feanil July 23, 2024 11:31

salman2013 closed this Jul 31, 2024

salman2013 reopened this Jul 31, 2024

kdmccormick requested changes Aug 9, 2024

View reviewed changes

salman2013 closed this Aug 14, 2024

salman2013 reopened this Aug 14, 2024

salman2013 closed this Aug 15, 2024

salman2013 reopened this Aug 15, 2024

kdmccormick marked this pull request as draft August 20, 2024 18:57

salman2013 requested a review from kdmccormick August 21, 2024 05:49

salman2013 marked this pull request as ready for review August 21, 2024 05:50

kdmccormick requested changes Aug 21, 2024

View reviewed changes

salman2013 changed the title ~~Replace paver quality commands~~ Replace Paver quality and js_test commands Aug 27, 2024

salman2013 requested a review from kdmccormick August 27, 2024 07:18

salman2013 mentioned this pull request Aug 27, 2024

Replace Paver quality and js_test commands #34845

Closed

kdmccormick requested changes Sep 4, 2024

View reviewed changes

salman2013 requested a review from kdmccormick September 12, 2024 10:47

kdmccormick reviewed Oct 24, 2024

View reviewed changes

Makefile Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

Makefile Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

kdmccormick mentioned this pull request Dec 3, 2024

Temporarily disable broken Webpack JS test suites #35955

Merged

kdmccormick mentioned this pull request Dec 4, 2024

Fix and re-enable tests for legacy Webpack-built JS #35956

Open

salman2013 requested a review from kdmccormick December 4, 2024 18:44

kdmccormick mentioned this pull request Dec 4, 2024

Script to print xsslint violations is missing #35965

Open

kdmccormick requested changes Dec 4, 2024

View reviewed changes

kdmccormick reviewed Dec 5, 2024

View reviewed changes

salman2013 requested a review from kdmccormick December 6, 2024 10:45

kdmccormick requested changes Dec 6, 2024

View reviewed changes

salman2013 force-pushed the salman/remove-paver-commands branch from a61d9a7 to ca2712a Compare December 10, 2024 14:39

salman2013 requested a review from kdmccormick December 10, 2024 14:40

kdmccormick approved these changes Dec 10, 2024

View reviewed changes

kdmccormick reviewed Dec 10, 2024

View reviewed changes

build: replace paver quality tests and js commands

f85d452

salman2013 force-pushed the salman/remove-paver-commands branch from 4788953 to f85d452 Compare December 11, 2024 06:03

salman2013 merged commit 1573c7b into openedx:master Dec 11, 2024
49 checks passed

salman2013 deleted the salman/remove-paver-commands branch December 11, 2024 14:15

kdmccormick mentioned this pull request Dec 11, 2024

build(eslint): Ignore Symlinks and Reduce Violation Limit #36010

Merged

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Replace Paver quality and js_test commands #35159

Replace Paver quality and js_test commands #35159

salman2013 commented Jul 23, 2024 •

edited

Loading

This comment was marked as outdated.

salman2013 commented Jul 23, 2024 •

edited

Loading

kdmccormick commented Jul 23, 2024

kdmccormick commented Jul 24, 2024

salman2013 commented Aug 5, 2024

kdmccormick left a comment

salman2013 commented Aug 21, 2024

kdmccormick left a comment

salman2013 commented Aug 27, 2024

kdmccormick left a comment

salman2013 commented Sep 12, 2024

kdmccormick commented Oct 24, 2024

kdmccormick left a comment

kdmccormick commented Dec 3, 2024 •

edited

Loading

salman2013 commented Dec 4, 2024

salman2013 commented Dec 4, 2024

kdmccormick left a comment

kdmccormick Dec 4, 2024

kdmccormick Dec 5, 2024

salman2013 Dec 6, 2024

kdmccormick Dec 6, 2024

salman2013 Dec 9, 2024

kdmccormick Dec 10, 2024 •

edited

Loading

kdmccormick left a comment •

edited

Loading

kdmccormick Dec 10, 2024

kdmccormick Dec 10, 2024 •

edited

Loading

feanil commented Dec 11, 2024

edx-pipeline-bot commented Dec 11, 2024

edx-pipeline-bot commented Dec 11, 2024

edx-pipeline-bot commented Dec 11, 2024

edx-pipeline-bot commented Dec 11, 2024

edx-pipeline-bot commented Dec 11, 2024

edx-pipeline-bot commented Dec 11, 2024

-        "."
+        "lms",
+        "cms",
+        "common",
+        "openedx",
+        "xmodule",

		@@ -0,0 +1,73 @@
		""" # pylint: disable=django-not-configured
		Check code quality using pycodestyle, pylint, and diff_quality.

Replace Paver quality and js_test commands #35159

Replace Paver quality and js_test commands #35159

Conversation

salman2013 commented Jul 23, 2024 • edited Loading

This comment was marked as outdated.

salman2013 commented Jul 23, 2024 • edited Loading

kdmccormick commented Jul 23, 2024

kdmccormick commented Jul 24, 2024

salman2013 commented Aug 5, 2024

kdmccormick left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

salman2013 commented Aug 21, 2024

kdmccormick left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

salman2013 commented Aug 27, 2024

kdmccormick left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

salman2013 commented Sep 12, 2024

kdmccormick commented Oct 24, 2024

kdmccormick left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

kdmccormick commented Dec 3, 2024 • edited Loading

salman2013 commented Dec 4, 2024

salman2013 commented Dec 4, 2024

kdmccormick left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

kdmccormick Dec 4, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

kdmccormick Dec 5, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

salman2013 Dec 6, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

kdmccormick Dec 6, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

salman2013 Dec 9, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

kdmccormick Dec 10, 2024 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

kdmccormick left a comment • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

kdmccormick Dec 10, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

kdmccormick Dec 10, 2024 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

feanil commented Dec 11, 2024

edx-pipeline-bot commented Dec 11, 2024

edx-pipeline-bot commented Dec 11, 2024

edx-pipeline-bot commented Dec 11, 2024

edx-pipeline-bot commented Dec 11, 2024

edx-pipeline-bot commented Dec 11, 2024

edx-pipeline-bot commented Dec 11, 2024

salman2013 commented Jul 23, 2024 •

edited

Loading

salman2013 commented Jul 23, 2024 •

edited

Loading

kdmccormick commented Dec 3, 2024 •

edited

Loading

kdmccormick Dec 10, 2024 •

edited

Loading

kdmccormick left a comment •

edited

Loading

kdmccormick Dec 10, 2024 •

edited

Loading