Add Codacy to CI?

[fragmuffin]

I recently added codacy to the cqparts CI chain for PRs, and I think it's going quite well.

• What do you think about adding it to cadquerys CI?
• Can you suggest a better alternative?

First Impressions / First Installing When first directed codacy toward the cqparts repo', it scared me with a terribly low quality score. But I quickly realised that most of that is knit-picking my less strict formatting of .md files, .js, .css, and other files that aren't really the main "product".

However, that's definitely a worthwhile project in the future: going through the lists of warnings, and either fixing the code, or manually checking them off as OK.

Advantage for PRs It will inform you of unused libraries, bad formatting, and potential security problems. I tried adding something like:

import subprocess, os
subprocess.Popen(os.environ['foo'])

And it failed the test, warning me that this addition could be dangerous. Then once I added a new commit with those changes removed, the test passed again... it's nifty.

Output is here (while it's still available): https://app.codacy.com/app/fragmuffin/cqparts/commit?bid=10377018&cid=302653800 ; I'm assuming it'll be deleted after some time 'lapses

[jmwright]

@fragmuffin Does GitHub use Codacy as a check before merging PRs?

[fragmuffin]

@jmwright

It does a check per commit to a PR, only running a check on what will be merged; it's just like TravisCI or AppVeyor, but the setup is much simpler.

So for example, the PR cqparts/cqparts#141 for commit 93375c3 has CI tasks listed as:

Link to the Codacy Details

When it's a green tick, the information isn't that useful, it's just a repeat of what's on github, but for failures, I think it gives a good list of the "failures", and suggestions on how to fix.

It could just be added for a trial, then removed if we don't like it... that's what I'm doing with cqparts, but so far I it's been useful, so I think it's staying.