Improve Linting #12133
Comments
This was referenced Jun 3, 2022
mergify bot
pushed a commit
that referenced
this issue
Jun 3, 2022
## Description This PR works towards #12133 and does a fumpt for consistency once sdk.Int is merged. The suggested merge order is to begin with sdk.Int, merge in the various linter PR's one by one, and then finally merge the changes to CI from #12134 --- ### Author Checklist *All items are required. Please add a note to the item if the item is not applicable and please add links to any relevant follow up issues.* I have... - [x] included the correct [type prefix](https://github.com/commitizen/conventional-commit-types/blob/v3.0.0/index.json) in the PR title - [x] added `!` to the type prefix if API or client breaking change - [x] targeted the correct branch (see [PR Targeting](https://github.com/cosmos/cosmos-sdk/blob/main/CONTRIBUTING.md#pr-targeting)) - [x] provided a link to the relevant issue or specification - [ ] followed the guidelines for [building modules](https://github.com/cosmos/cosmos-sdk/blob/main/docs/building-modules) - [ ] included the necessary unit and integration [tests](https://github.com/cosmos/cosmos-sdk/blob/main/CONTRIBUTING.md#testing) - [ ] added a changelog entry to `CHANGELOG.md` - [ ] included comments for [documenting Go code](https://blog.golang.org/godoc) - [ ] updated the relevant documentation or specification - [x] reviewed "Files changed" and left comments if necessary - [x] confirmed all CI checks have passed ### Reviewers Checklist *All items are required. Please add a note if the item is not applicable and please add your handle next to the items reviewed if you only reviewed selected items.* I have... - [ ] confirmed the correct [type prefix](https://github.com/commitizen/conventional-commit-types/blob/v3.0.0/index.json) in the PR title - [ ] confirmed `!` in the type prefix if API or client breaking change - [ ] confirmed all author checklist items have been addressed - [ ] reviewed state machine logic - [ ] reviewed API design and naming - [ ] reviewed documentation is accurate - [ ] reviewed tests and test coverage - [ ] manually tested (if applicable)
|
What do you mean by not doing a diff? Golangci-lint provides errors and if there are any, it blocks the PR until they're resolved. I say we do take them pretty seriously, no? |
|
I'm... not sure. If you have a look through the PR's I made, I was able to solve pretty much countless linting issues. Like you, I'm sure that I have seen that github action fire. However, what I put together, defies my eyes re: the github action. I'd love your thoughts on what happened, because I am not sure. -- maybe we take them seriously, if CI shows them to us? I don't know how else to explain my findings today. |
I wonder if that's because linting is only applied against the new code/diff, which I guess is what you mean? In any case, let's get the actions job up and running and resolve any old code that doesn't conform to the linter. How does that sound? |
|
Sounds awesome :) |
mergify bot
pushed a commit
that referenced
this issue
Jun 30, 2022
## Description This PR works towards #12133 and does a fumpt for consistency once sdk.Int is merged. The suggested merge order is to begin with sdk.Int, merge in the various linter PR's one by one, and then finally merge the changes to CI from #12134 --- ### Author Checklist *All items are required. Please add a note to the item if the item is not applicable and please add links to any relevant follow up issues.* I have... - [x] included the correct [type prefix](https://github.com/commitizen/conventional-commit-types/blob/v3.0.0/index.json) in the PR title - [x] added `!` to the type prefix if API or client breaking change - [x] targeted the correct branch (see [PR Targeting](https://github.com/cosmos/cosmos-sdk/blob/main/CONTRIBUTING.md#pr-targeting)) - [x] provided a link to the relevant issue or specification - [ ] followed the guidelines for [building modules](https://github.com/cosmos/cosmos-sdk/blob/main/docs/building-modules) - [ ] included the necessary unit and integration [tests](https://github.com/cosmos/cosmos-sdk/blob/main/CONTRIBUTING.md#testing) - [ ] added a changelog entry to `CHANGELOG.md` - [ ] included comments for [documenting Go code](https://blog.golang.org/godoc) - [ ] updated the relevant documentation or specification - [x] reviewed "Files changed" and left comments if necessary - [x] confirmed all CI checks have passed ### Reviewers Checklist *All items are required. Please add a note if the item is not applicable and please add your handle next to the items reviewed if you only reviewed selected items.* I have... - [ ] confirmed the correct [type prefix](https://github.com/commitizen/conventional-commit-types/blob/v3.0.0/index.json) in the PR title - [ ] confirmed `!` in the type prefix if API or client breaking change - [ ] confirmed all author checklist items have been addressed - [ ] reviewed state machine logic - [ ] reviewed API design and naming - [ ] reviewed documentation is accurate - [ ] reviewed tests and test coverage - [ ] manually tested (if applicable) (cherry picked from commit b7097c3) # Conflicts: # CHANGELOG.md # x/group/keeper/keeper.go
|
Hey, I think this is done :D |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Summary of Bug
We can improve linting by:
taking linter errors more seriously?(or was ci hiding them from us? I am confused by what I found)This will have positive effects downstream, too. By having a standard set of linting processes in the cosmos sdk, downstream projects will have standardized expectations of what linters to obey or ignore when working with the cosmos sdk.
Related pull requests:
Version
all
Steps to Reproduce
use the ci system on the sdk, then compare the result to a local run of golangci-lint
For Admin Use
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: