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

Revert usage of --codescanning-config flag #1018

Merged
merged 1 commit into from Apr 5, 2022

Conversation

edoardopirovano
Copy link
Contributor

@edoardopirovano edoardopirovano commented Apr 5, 2022

Backs out the change from #957 and most of the subsequent fix to it in #999 (although I've left some code in place to make it easier to do this again in future).

A customer has run into another issue with this change: the Action allows specifying additional queries directly in the workflow file rather than in the config file, but the new code path does not respect these additional queries. The proper fix here, I think, is that we should have the Action inject these additional queries into the config file we pass to the CLI, like we are already doing for the ATM queries. In the interest of caution, however, I think we should revert this change temporarily while we get a stable version into GHES 3.5, then add it in with the aforementioned fix and a new test to cover this case once code freeze has passed.

Merge / deployment checklist

  • Confirm this change is backwards compatible with existing workflows.
  • Confirm the readme has been updated if necessary.
  • Confirm the changelog has been updated if necessary.

@edoardopirovano edoardopirovano requested a review from a team as a code owner Apr 5, 2022
@edoardopirovano edoardopirovano merged commit 9cab82f into main Apr 5, 2022
254 checks passed
@edoardopirovano edoardopirovano deleted the edoardo/revert-codescanning-config branch Apr 5, 2022
This was referenced Apr 5, 2022
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

2 participants