WIP: head toward a canonical way to phrase sys.path setup

[albu-diku]

No description provided.

[albu-diku]

@jonasbardino retrieved this from a couple weeks back ..consider it a draft of boilerplate for nicer module errors.

[jonasbardino]

A very welcome addition, however 👍
It's a simple but elegant way to detect installation / PYTHONPATH issues, while effectively differentiating them from import errors due to actual bugs in our code.

Please remember the copyright header in all new source code files, including ones like the placeholder mig.ident. I think it would actually make sense to perhaps have a string constant or two there (say PACKAGE=migrid or the like) as well.
You can simply copy the header e.g. from shared.base or use the addheader.py helper with minor adjustment for module name and year.

[albu-diku]

A very welcome addition, however 👍 It's a simple but elegant way to detect installation / PYTHONPATH issues, while effectively differentiating them from import errors due to actual bugs in our code.

Please remember the copyright header in all new source code files, including ones like the placeholder mig.ident. I think it would actually make sense to perhaps have a string constant or two there (say PACKAGE=migrid or the like) as well. You can simply copy the header e.g. from shared.base or use the addheader.py helper with minor adjustment for module name and year.

Sorry just picking up the comment here - should we add a copyright header to a completely empty file? That's honestly why I didn't do it.. there wasn't anything to copyright albeit that might well be "yet".

[jonasbardino]

Well, one can surely argue that it's pedantic and there's little to copyright in a minimal or empty file, but on the other hand the fact that the file is there at all has meaning / value for these package init files. It's not critical here, but sometimes it's just easier to consistently add the same boiler-plate everywhere. Especially when the "yet" part kicks in later and one forgets adding it then :)