Ruff run format command

[RomeoAva]

Hello, I am trying to use Ruff through this Github action. My issue is when I use the command ruff check file.py it will only alert me on bugs such as imports not used etc, but doesn't alert me on formatting errors. To get those errors I use the command ruff format --check file.py which would give me:

Would reformat: app/file.py
1 file would be reformatted

My issue is that the megalinter ruff linter only seems to allow the check command. I tried to tweak it inside the mega-linter.yml config but not luck:

  PYTHON_RUFF_COMMAND_REMOVE_ARGUMENTS: 'check'
  PYTHON_RUFF_ARGUMENTS: 'format --check'

https://megalinter.io/latest/descriptors/python_ruff/#ruff-documentation

It works with the official Github ruff-action with this workflow but I would prefer to use the one with megalinter since it has more overall features

name: Ruff
on: [pull_request]
jobs:
  ruff:
    runs-on: ubuntu-latest
    steps:
      - uses: actions/checkout@v3
      - uses: chartboost/ruff-action@v1
        with:
          src: "./app"
          args: format --check

Any ideas? Thank you for your help

[nvuillam]

@RomeoAva please can you try with:

  PYTHON_RUFF_COMMAND_REMOVE_ARGUMENTS: 'check'
  PYTHON_RUFF_ARGUMENTS: ['format','--check']
  LOG_LEVEL: DEBUG

And see what is the command line built by MegaLinter in the logs ?

[RomeoAva]

@RomeoAva please can you try with:

  PYTHON_RUFF_COMMAND_REMOVE_ARGUMENTS: 'check'
  PYTHON_RUFF_ARGUMENTS: ['format','--check']
  LOG_LEVEL: DEBUG

And see what is the command line built by MegaLinter in the logs ?

Hi @nvuillam, when using PYTHON_RUFF_ARGUMENTS: ['format','--check'] I face the following error:

The workflow is not valid. .github/workflows/mega-linter.yml (Line: 27, Col: 26): A sequence was not expected

I believe this is due to the brackets not being allowed here.

And when running it with the following:

  PYTHON_RUFF_COMMAND_REMOVE_ARGUMENTS: 'check'
  PYTHON_RUFF_ARGUMENTS: 'format --check'

I get this error:

❌ Linted [PYTHON] files with [ruff]: Found 1 error(s) - (0.02s) (expand for details)
  - Using [ruff v0.1.14] https://megalinter.io/beta/descriptors/python_ruff
  - MegaLinter key: [PYTHON_RUFF]
  - Rules config: [.ruff.toml]
  - Number of files analyzed: [11]
  --Error detail:
  error: unexpected argument '--check' found

    tip: to pass '--check' as a value, use '-- --check'

  Usage: ruff check <FILES|--fix|--no-fix|--unsafe-fixes|--no-unsafe-fixes|--show-source|--no-show-source|--show-fixes|--no-show-fixes|--diff|--watch|--fix-only|--no-fix-only|--ignore-noqa|--output-format <OUTPUT_FORMAT>|--output-file <OUTPUT_FILE>|--target-version <TARGET_VERSION>|--preview|--no-preview|--config <CONFIG>|--select <RULE_CODE>|--ignore <RULE_CODE>|--extend-select <RULE_CODE>|--extend-ignore <RULE_CODE>|--per-file-ignores <PER_FILE_IGNORES>|--extend-per-file-ignores <EXTEND_PER_FILE_IGNORES>|--exclude <FILE_PATTERN>|--extend-exclude <FILE_PATTERN>|--fixable <RULE_CODE>|--unfixable <RULE_CODE>|--extend-fixable <RULE_CODE>|--extend-unfixable <RULE_CODE>|--respect-gitignore|--no-respect-gitignore|--force-exclude|--no-force-exclude|--line-length <LINE_LENGTH>|--dummy-variable-rgx <DUMMY_VARIABLE_RGX>|--no-cache|--isolated|--cache-dir <CACHE_DIR>|--stdin-filename <STDIN_FILENAME>|--extension <EXTENSION>|--exit-zero|--exit-non-zero-on-fix|--statistics|--add-noqa|--show-files|--show-settings|--ecosystem-ci>

[nvuillam]

Would this work ?

PYTHON_RUFF_ARGUMENTS:
- format
- --check

[echoix]

From what I understand, formatting in ruff is more like a second tool, like an (almost) drop in replacement for black, and the linter is a replacement for all other linters. So it's quite possible we'd have to call it like a linter, and a second time just like we call black, for the formatting part. The check flag is like black's check flag, where it will only show if it would change the file, but not do the changes.

[nvuillam]

So maybe we should declare a second linter "PYTHON_RUFF_FORMATTER" ?

[ipmb]

That's correct @echoix

Ruff has a linter that is closer to what Flake8 does That is run with ruff check and ruff check --fix

It recently released a formatter that can replace Black. That is run with ruff format --check and ruff format

[github-actions[bot]]

This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed in 14 days if no further activity occurs. Thank you for your contributions.

If you think this issue should stay open, please remove the O: stale 🤖 label or comment on the issue.

[echoix]

Bump

[github-actions[bot]]

This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed in 14 days if no further activity occurs. Thank you for your contributions.

If you think this issue should stay open, please remove the O: stale 🤖 label or comment on the issue.

[echoix]

@Skitionek

[github-actions[bot]]

This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed in 14 days if no further activity occurs. Thank you for your contributions.

If you think this issue should stay open, please remove the O: stale 🤖 label or comment on the issue.

[paulostradioti]

Hi guys, Are there any updates on this? It'd be very useful to also being able to run the format check as well.

[JobaDiniz]

Until this is not made officially available, is there any workaround @RomeoAva that you are using?

[RomeoAva]

Hi all, I didn't find a work around using this action unfortunately. I ended up using this Ruff action with something like this:

name: Ruff
on:
  workflow_call:
jobs:
  ruff:
    runs-on: ubuntu-latest
    steps:
      - uses: actions/checkout@v3
      - uses: chartboost/ruff-action@v1
        with:
          src: "./app"
          args: format --check

[echoix]

@nvuillam and maybe even @TommyE123 Do you have an idea on the approach to use for implementing ruff format?

ruff was initially only a linter. Now it has fixes too. Then ruff added another command, ruff format, that acts similar to black, to format files. Black and ruff, while very similar, can't really be used together, because of known and justified differences. As I tried again today, one will make changes that the other will also change, and running the first again will still revert some changes. As such, it is either one or the other.

For me, its clear that the linter key will be PYTHON_RUFF_FORMAT. What about the existing one, is it still PYTHON_RUFF? Or should it be PYTHON_RUFF_CHECK? That would be quite a breaking change.

There is also a list of ruff rules that contradict the ruff formatter, as listed here: https://docs.astral.sh/ruff/formatter/#conflicting-lint-rules. By default, ruff only enables a subset of the now 800+ rules, excluding the ones conflicting with the formatter. Is there anything for us to do here?

[nvuillam]

I think that if a linter can format and fix, it should be declared twice:

• once as a formatter
• once as a linter that can fix

MegaLinter internal architeture is able to work with the pattern CHECK -> FIX , there is no room for CHECK -> FORMAT -> FIX ^^

And formatters are also non blocking by default