linting/validators about molecule

[kireledan]

To me this seems a bit unnecessary. The only validator that I think molecule would need would be a dry-run or just a quick syntax check.

[conorsch]

OK, I'll bite: i'm a fan of the linting. There are lots of nearly unreadable Ansible roles out there, and Serverspec tests are similarly garish, given that they're mostly written by folks who don't code Ruby full-time for their day jobs. The linting that Molecule runs automatically helps enforce a consistent pattern across projects.

If you don't like the linting setup, you can use the molecule.ignore_paths list to skip linting (docs). In general I'm a fan of configuration, but let's not get lost in the weeds: the goal of Molecule, as I understand it, is to test Ansible roles and ensure they confirm to community standards.

That said, I'll agree that with your breakdown of linters for languages, but I'm skeptical that the additional complexity for "severity signaling" in linting is valuable. It is however consistant with the --destroy=always|passing|never pragma, also used in test-kitchen.

[retr0h]

OK, I'll bite: i'm a fan of the linting. There are lots of nearly unreadable Ansible roles out there, and Serverspec tests are similarly garish, given that they're mostly written by folks who don't code Ruby full-time for their day jobs. The linting that Molecule runs automatically helps enforce a consistent pattern across projects.

I agree with @conorsch. The point of molecule is to be somewhat prescriptive. Everyone may not agree with it, but I'm not asking everyone to.

I would rather see us implement the linters @dhutty suggested above, but not have the ability to turn them on or off. We are enforcing common practices, and we cannot please everyone.

[kireledan]

I definitely agree with the decision of not being able to turn them on or off. If molecule's goal is to enforce a community standard then there should be no option to avoid it.