chore: add additional linters and fix findings

[sahidvelji]

This PR

• add linters and fix the findings
• upgrade dependencies including golangci-lint version

[gemini-code-assist]

Summary of Changes

Hello @sahidvelji, I'm Gemini Code Assist¹! I'm currently reviewing this pull request and will post my feedback shortly. In the meantime, here's a summary to help you and other reviewers quickly get up to speed!

This pull request focuses on bolstering the project's code quality, security, and adherence to modern Go idioms. It introduces a suite of new linters to catch potential issues, updates critical development dependencies, and refactors test code to leverage 't.Context()' for better context management. Additionally, it includes minor optimizations for map operations and general code clean-up, contributing to a more robust and maintainable codebase.

Highlights

• Enhanced Linting Configuration: Added 'gosec', 'modernize', 'nolintlint', and 'usetesting' linters to '.golangci.yml' for improved code quality and security analysis. Specific exclusions for 'gosec' (G101, G404) and 'govet' (fieldalignment, shadow) were also configured.
• Dependency Updates: Upgraded 'golangci-lint' to 'v2.7.1' in the 'Makefile' and updated several Go module dependencies, including 'golang.org/x/sync', 'golang.org/x/text', 'github.com/hashicorp/go-memdb', and 'github.com/spf13/pflag'.
• Idiomatic Test Context Usage: Refactored numerous test files to utilize 't.Context()' instead of 'context.Background()' or 'context.TODO()', aligning with best practices for Go testing and ensuring proper context propagation within tests.
• Optimized Map Operations: Switched to using 'maps.Copy' for copying attributes in 'EvaluationContext' and 'TrackingEventDetails', improving efficiency and readability compared to manual loops.
• Code Clean-up: Removed unused 'context' imports from several files and updated 'reflect.Value{}' comparisons to the more robust '!field.IsValid()' in test assertions.

Using Gemini Code Assist

The full guide for Gemini Code Assist can be found on our documentation page, here are some quick tips.

Invoking Gemini

You can request assistance from Gemini at any point by creating a comment using either /gemini <command> or @gemini-code-assist <command>. Below is a summary of the supported commands on the current page.

Feature	Command	Description
Code Review	/gemini review	Performs a code review for the current pull request in its current state.
Pull Request Summary	/gemini summary	Provides a summary of the current pull request in its current state.
Comment	@gemini-code-assist	Responds in comments when explicitly tagged, both in pull request comments and review comments.
Help	/gemini help	Displays a list of available commands.

Customization

To customize Gemini Code Assist for GitHub experience, repository maintainers can create a configuration file and/or provide a custom code review style guide (such as PEP-8 for Python) by creating and adding files to a .gemini/ folder in the base of the repository. Detailed instructions can be found here.

Limitations & Feedback

Gemini Code Assist may make mistakes. Please leave feedback on any instances where its feedback is incorrect or counter productive. You can react with 👍 and 👎 on @gemini-code-assist comments. If you're interested in giving your feedback about your experience with Gemini Code Assist for Github and other Google products, sign up here.

You can also get AI-powered code generation, chat, as well as code reviews directly in the IDE at no cost with the Gemini Code Assist IDE Extension.

Footnotes

1. Review the Privacy Notices, Generative AI Prohibited Use Policy, Terms of Service, and learn how to configure Gemini Code Assist in GitHub here. Gemini can make mistakes, so double check it and use code with caution. ↩

[codecov]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 83.12%. Comparing base (e1a25e6) to head (80af86e).
⚠️ Report is 1 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main     #451      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   83.15%   83.12%   -0.03%     
==========================================
  Files          27       27              
  Lines        2101     2098       -3     
==========================================
- Hits         1747     1744       -3     
  Misses        305      305              
  Partials       49       49              

Flag	Coverage Δ
e2e	83.12% <100.00%> (-0.03%)	⬇️
unit	83.12% <100.00%> (-0.03%)	⬇️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

[gemini-code-assist]

Code Review

This pull request introduces additional linters and applies the resulting fixes, which is a great step towards improving code quality and consistency. The changes include modernizing the codebase by using maps.Copy, bytes.SplitSeq, and reflect.TypeFor, as well as adopting best practices like using t.Context() in tests. These are all excellent improvements.

I've found a couple of issues that need attention. One is a critical issue in the Makefile that will break the linting commands, and another is a medium-severity issue regarding a removed nolint directive that could lead to new linter warnings.