Clean up documentation in the HostingService class

Review Request #8913 — Created April 21, 2017 and submitted

Information

Review Board
release-2.5.x

Reviewers

This patch brings the rest of hostingsvcs.service into line with our
documentation practices, e.g., module docstrings, PEP 257, etc.

Built the docs and looked through them.

Description From Last Updated

Missing period.

chipx86chipx86

I'd say "The repository the key must be associated with."

chipx86chipx86

We're not adding the key.

chipx86chipx86

These are written more like: "An error occurred during communication with the hosting service." Same format below.

chipx86chipx86

These are only ignored in the default implementation. There's much more that's included (and that we should probably document and …

chipx86chipx86

I wouldn't say "if applicable." This should instead be elaborated on in the description.

chipx86chipx86

"from"

chipx86chipx86

Extra blank line.

chipx86chipx86

"The" We may want to use a numbered list for these.

chipx86chipx86

"Return"

chipx86chipx86

"Return"

chipx86chipx86

Should specify what this means. Otherwise it sounds like it's perhaps a database ID. It's actually specific to the hosting …

chipx86chipx86

"The provided plan is not valid for the hosting service."

chipx86chipx86

I wouldn't say "in question." Instead, something more like what get_bug_tracker_field has.

chipx86chipx86

No indentation.

chipx86chipx86

Same suggestion as earlier.

chipx86chipx86

This is missing a Returns block.

chipx86chipx86

Returns: section?

daviddavid

Returns: section? I know that this implementation doesn't return, but it would be nice to list it so subclassers know …

daviddavid

Raises?

daviddavid

W293 blank line contains whitespace

reviewbotreviewbot

W293 blank line contains whitespace

reviewbotreviewbot

W293 blank line contains whitespace

reviewbotreviewbot

W293 blank line contains whitespace

reviewbotreviewbot

W293 blank line contains whitespace

reviewbotreviewbot

W293 blank line contains whitespace

reviewbotreviewbot

W293 blank line contains whitespace

reviewbotreviewbot
brennie
chipx86
  1. 
      
  2. reviewboard/hostingsvcs/service.py (Diff revision 2)
     
     
    Show all issues

    Missing period.

  3. reviewboard/hostingsvcs/service.py (Diff revision 2)
     
     
    Show all issues

    I'd say "The repository the key must be associated with."

  4. reviewboard/hostingsvcs/service.py (Diff revision 2)
     
     
    Show all issues

    We're not adding the key.

  5. reviewboard/hostingsvcs/service.py (Diff revision 2)
     
     
     
    Show all issues

    These are written more like: "An error occurred during communication with the hosting service."

    Same format below.

  6. reviewboard/hostingsvcs/service.py (Diff revision 2)
     
     
     
     
     
     
    Show all issues

    These are only ignored in the default implementation. There's much more that's included (and that we should probably document and provide in the signature).

    See the call to hosting_service.check_repository in reviewboard/scmtools/forms.py.

  7. reviewboard/hostingsvcs/service.py (Diff revision 2)
     
     
    Show all issues

    I wouldn't say "if applicable." This should instead be elaborated on in the description.

  8. reviewboard/hostingsvcs/service.py (Diff revision 2)
     
     
    Show all issues

    "from"

  9. reviewboard/hostingsvcs/service.py (Diff revision 2)
     
     
     
     
    Show all issues

    Extra blank line.

  10. reviewboard/hostingsvcs/service.py (Diff revision 2)
     
     
     
    Show all issues

    "The"

    We may want to use a numbered list for these.

  11. reviewboard/hostingsvcs/service.py (Diff revision 2)
     
     
    Show all issues

    "Return"

  12. reviewboard/hostingsvcs/service.py (Diff revision 2)
     
     
    Show all issues

    "Return"

  13. reviewboard/hostingsvcs/service.py (Diff revision 2)
     
     
    Show all issues

    Should specify what this means. Otherwise it sounds like it's perhaps a database ID. It's actually specific to the hosting service in question, and should be opaque to the caller.

  14. reviewboard/hostingsvcs/service.py (Diff revision 2)
     
     
    Show all issues

    "The provided plan is not valid for the hosting service."

  15. reviewboard/hostingsvcs/service.py (Diff revision 2)
     
     
    Show all issues

    I wouldn't say "in question." Instead, something more like what get_bug_tracker_field has.

  16. reviewboard/hostingsvcs/service.py (Diff revision 2)
     
     
     
    Show all issues

    No indentation.

  17. reviewboard/hostingsvcs/service.py (Diff revision 2)
     
     
    Show all issues

    Same suggestion as earlier.

  18. reviewboard/hostingsvcs/service.py (Diff revision 2)
     
     
     
    Show all issues

    This is missing a Returns block.

  19. 
      
brennie
brennie
david
  1. 
      
  2. reviewboard/hostingsvcs/service.py (Diff revision 4)
     
     
     
    Show all issues

    Returns: section?

  3. reviewboard/hostingsvcs/service.py (Diff revision 4)
     
     
    Show all issues

    Returns: section? I know that this implementation doesn't return, but it would be nice to list it so subclassers know what to do.

  4. reviewboard/hostingsvcs/service.py (Diff revision 4)
     
     
    Show all issues

    Raises?

  5. 
      
brennie
Review request changed
Change Summary:

Address David's issues

Checks run (1 failed, 1 succeeded)

flake8 failed.
JSHint passed.

flake8

brennie
brennie
Review request changed

Checks run (1 failed, 1 succeeded)

flake8 failed.
JSHint passed.

flake8

brennie
david
  1. Ship It!
  2. 
      
brennie
Review request changed
Status:
Completed
Change Summary:
Pushed to release-2.5.x (767821d)