Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Proposing v3.0.0 with updates and new features #151

Open
wants to merge 10 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

henrycpainter
Copy link

New features:

  • Adds ability to pass own list of files, as output by git diff.
  • Adds ability to specify base and ref if in PR and so override the API-only behviour.
  • Adds ability to add paths-ignore to filter rules. Ignore an array of patterns when filtering per rule.
  • Adds ability to provide a file similar to .gitignore to globally ignore patterns.
  • Validates input and introduces type-guards with appropriate error messages.
  • Passes array of strings to picomatch directly where possible rather than looping through strings.

Additionally:

  • Updates all packages.
  • Bumps up to node 16.
  • Minifies build to reduce package size.

Breaking changes:

  • All previous features & configuration is tested to be backwards compatible HOWEVER tighter validation may result in previously invalid but passable inputs resulting in failure.

@henrycpainter
Copy link
Author

@dorny Grateful if we could get a pair of eyes on these changes and see if it's fit for purpose.

@TenSt
Copy link

TenSt commented Sep 19, 2022

Hi @henrycpainter @dorny! Any ETA on this release? I'm waiting for the paths-ignore functionality and it would be great to know when to expect it rolled out! Thanks for the great work!

@noga-dev
Copy link

noga-dev commented Oct 7, 2022

@henrycpainter I think you should do a release on your fork to avoid indefinite limbo on this pr.

Until then we'll have to do

uses: henrycpainter/paths-filter@c1883b96b02d6e44ec1dbdf235f3bb729d65b247

@noga-dev
Copy link

noga-dev commented Oct 7, 2022

I should note that I'm not a fan of the exclude syntax in this PR.

I prefer #106 's formatting instead of this as it ends up too verbose and pythonic.

@dorny
Copy link
Owner

dorny commented Oct 11, 2022

Hey guys, sorry for not responding sooner. I was inactive on the project for some time. I will go through the proposal but it will take me some time and there's no ETA. Meanwhile forking the project and implementing any changes you need is the way to go.

@Superskyyy
Copy link

Dear @dorny, I hope this message finds you well. I was wondering if you had time to take a look at this PR? I believe this feature could be very beneficial for large projects, potentially saving significant time in the CI process. Merging it into the upstream project will help a lot.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

5 participants