Appease scalafmt with extraneous comma#978
Conversation
stevedlawrence
left a comment
stevedlawrence
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
+1, I'm not sure why there's all the extra runs in the github actions. Maybe it's because you accidentally pushed to the apache/daffodil repo instead of your fork? FYI, I came acrossd a bit of a hack that prevents this: Assuming "asf" is your apache/daffodil remote, you can do:
git remote set-url --push asf "push to apache/daffodil disabled"This is a hack because it changes the push url for the asf remote to a string that doesn't resolve to an actual repo. So git will complain if you ever try to push to asf.
|
We should add this command to some setup instructions.
I plan to use this on all my github/gitlab based projects that use the
fork+review discipline
…On Fri, Mar 3, 2023 at 8:00 AM Steve Lawrence ***@***.***> wrote:
***@***.**** approved this pull request.
+1, I'm not sure why there's all the extra runs in the github actions.
Maybe it's because you accidentally pushed to the apache/daffodil repo
instead of your fork? FYI, I came acrossd a bit of a hack that prevents
this: Assuming "asf" is your apache/daffodil remote, you can do:
git remote set-url --push asf "push to apache/daffodil disabled"
This is a hack because it changes the push url for the asf remote to a
string that doesn't resolve to an actual repo. So git will complain if you
ever try to push to asf.
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#978 (review)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AALUDAZIKGS2ZHEHW2F2NDTW2HTPHANCNFSM6AAAAAAVORQC54>
.
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.Message
ID: ***@***.***>
|
|
Ah, I think I realized what happened. On my one machine I have my "origin" set to my daffodil fork, but the other machine 'origin' points to the main branch. My mistake there. |
Good call. I've added it to step 6 of the Code Contributor Workflow |
|
Honestly, the only way I stay sane with git is no remote is named "origin". I name them all based on who owns them. My fork is named mbeckerle. If for review I pull down someone else' fork to look at more closely than a github review, the name of that remote is that person's username. The central daffodil repo is named "asf", at my job the central repos for other projects are named "owl", or if they are for clients it's the client/project's name. |
| SDW( | ||
| WarnID.InvalidAnnotationPoint, | ||
| "Annotations placed directly on a group definition will be ignored by DFDL. Any annotation expected to be processed by DFDL should instead be placed on the group reference, sequence or choice." | ||
| "Annotations placed directly on a group definition will be ignored by DFDL. Any annotation expected to be processed by DFDL should instead be placed on the group reference, sequence or choice.", |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
If this comma is truly required, then our scalafmt rules are wrong.
This comma should be tolerated, ... maybe... but not required.
This is not a list, it's the arguments to a function call. They are fundamentally different concepts that only occasionally overlap.
4 participants
In my last PR I missed that scalafmt wasn't happy after I removed what I thought was an extraneous comma. The PR page said that all checks had passed, but it must have been stale and needed refreshing to see the scalamt fail.