[AZEM2-1972] Loosen the PHPMD rules a bit to be more inline with Magento usage

[CyberSecutor]

No description provided.

[leonhelmus]

@CyberSecutor love this change!

[leonhelmus]

@CyberSecutor could you also add:
Magento2.Commenting.ConstantsPHPDocFormatting.MissingConstantPHPDoc
as an exclude for phpcs?

[Anve94]

I think it's good to keep in mind we can handle rules in 3 ways:

• In the core configuration of the testing suite
• By overriding the configuration tree in a specific project if the dev team makes different team agreements
• By ignoring the linting warning/error through docblock suppression

I am personally less opinionated about Magento rulesets these days, so I'm mostly writing this comment to stress (and reiterate) that in the end it's also important that we have a process in place that is not 'Pietje prefers this over what we have and Jantje prefers that over what we have'. From the dev guild, we are looking into streamlining the process also. So I don't see any reason to block this but please also critically think whether we should loosen this for absolutely everybody.

If any of you all have ideas on how to handle such changes better and more fairly (case by case vote, RFC with argumentation, DACI/RACI model with the guild/role x/person y being Driver/Responsible etc.) also feel free to reach out!

[CyberSecutor]

I think it's good to keep in mind we can handle rules in 3 ways:

• In the core configuration of the testing suite
• By overriding the configuration tree in a specific project if the dev team makes different team agreements
• By ignoring the linting warning/error through docblock suppression

I am personally less opinionated about Magento rulesets these days, so I'm mostly writing this comment to stress (and reiterate) that in the end it's also important that we have a process in place that is not 'Pietje prefers this over what we have and Jantje prefers that over what we have'. From the dev guild, we are looking into streamlining the process also. So I don't see any reason to block this but please also critically think whether we should loosen this for absolutely everybody.

If any of you all have ideas on how to handle such changes better and more fairly (case by case vote, RFC with argumentation, DACI/RACI model with the guild/role x/person y being Driver/Responsible etc.) also feel free to reach out!

[CyberSecutor]

Oops, wrong button 😄

I agree @Anve94 , these decissions need to be a consensus. That's also why pull requests exist, but there is a limited number of eyes on there.
However in my opinion it's also not desirable for every change to have to wait on a guild meeting to be discussed and approved.

Maybe changes can be noted somewhere, and discussed later. If needed they can then be reverted.

[CyberSecutor]

@CyberSecutor could you also add: Magento2.Commenting.ConstantsPHPDocFormatting.MissingConstantPHPDoc as an exclude for phpcs?

@leonhelmus fixed in this PR for PHPCS:
#66

[leonhelmus]

@igorwulff i would like to know how the ecom guild should pick these kinds changes. I believe this should be discussed in developer guild or atleast have a process in place on how to make exceptions. Like @Anve94 says

[Anve94]

@leonhelmus @CyberSecutor I didnt block for a reason ;) Until we have something in place in terms of process, PRs are the way to go of course. And opening a PR and having default reviewers can of course be "a process". It's just something that needs deciding on