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

Add "Reviewed by Hound" badge #6150

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Nov 1, 2018
Merged

Add "Reviewed by Hound" badge #6150

merged 2 commits into from
Nov 1, 2018

Conversation

salbertson
Copy link
Contributor

@salbertson salbertson commented Oct 17, 2018

screenshot 2018-10-18 09 49 13

@theforeman-bot
Copy link
Member

Do not merge! This patch has not been tested yet.

Can an existing organization member please verify this patch?

2 similar comments
@theforeman-bot
Copy link
Member

Do not merge! This patch has not been tested yet.

Can an existing organization member please verify this patch?

@theforeman-bot
Copy link
Member

Do not merge! This patch has not been tested yet.

Can an existing organization member please verify this patch?

@theforeman-bot
Copy link
Member

There were the following issues with the commit message:

  • c85f918 must be in the format fixes #redmine_number - brief description

If you don't have a ticket number, please create an issue in Redmine.

More guidelines are available in Coding Standards or on the Foreman wiki.


This message was auto-generated by Foreman's prprocessor

@mmoll
Copy link
Contributor

mmoll commented Oct 17, 2018

👎 from me for adding the hound badge, as we recently moved away from it for JS (because we can't use eslint plugins in it) and personally I'd also like to remove it for the Ruby code, mainly as houndci/hound#1250 is still unsolved after almost two years and also we can't use Rubocop plugins in hound.

@lzap
Copy link
Member

lzap commented Oct 18, 2018

I personally would not mind having that in our README until we decide to remove it. It did decent job already, it is not perfect but I still find it useful. But that's not reason to refuse such patch. I also see there is something happening in the relevant PR which is a good sign already.

@salbertson please remove the image and amend. This is far from being decided yet, we are a big team.

@salbertson
Copy link
Contributor Author

@mmoll we are making progress on configuring linter versions, it's really close. houndci/hound#1250 (comment)

@salbertson
Copy link
Contributor Author

it is not perfect but I still find it useful

@lzap I'd love to hear how we can make it better. Are there any other issues you've been waiting on?

@theforeman-bot
Copy link
Member

There were the following issues with the commit message:

  • c85f918 must be in the format fixes #redmine_number - brief description
  • 87052b2 must be in the format fixes #redmine_number - brief description

If you don't have a ticket number, please create an issue in Redmine.

More guidelines are available in Coding Standards or on the Foreman wiki.


This message was auto-generated by Foreman's prprocessor

@lzap
Copy link
Member

lzap commented Oct 19, 2018

@salbertson nah, I am good, thanks. I created thread on our site to bring some attention to the discussion: https://community.theforeman.org/t/reviewed-by-hound/11512

@timogoebel
Copy link
Member

@salbertson: Please see this threads for issues we have with hound:

https://community.theforeman.org/t/replacing-hound-ci-for-the-js-stack/11116
https://community.theforeman.org/t/houndci-annoying/6475/8

The two most painful things in my opinion are:

  • The linter versions are not configurable.
  • It's very easy for "unlinted" code to still sneak in. I'm not sure, why.
  • I dislike the inline comments in the Code. They feel like spam to me.

@salbertson
Copy link
Contributor Author

@timogoebel awesome, thank you for the feedback! We are actively working on making linter versions configurable and the option to move comments out of the code changes, using GitHub's Checks interface.

houndci/hound#1250 (comment)

houndci/hound#1597

It's very easy for "unlinted" code to still sneak in. I'm not sure, why.

Do you have any more detail or a good example for us to look into?

@ohadlevy
Copy link
Member

I personally think that as long as we use hound (and we still do) we should have the badge in our readme, if / when we decide to move away from it, we should remove it too, 👍 to merge this PR.

@ekohl
Copy link
Member

ekohl commented Oct 29, 2018

Do you have any more detail or a good example for us to look into?

If you only check diffs then you assume a strictly linear history. Let's say you submit a PR X that has a certain coding style, submit & merge PR Y that changes the coding style and then merge PR X. Now you have a commit with a different coding style that could still have passed checks.

@lzap
Copy link
Member

lzap commented Nov 1, 2018

@ohadlevy you want to comment on the discourse thread then?

I think it's fair to give credit, folks already expressed they commitment to make sure the badge stays there for as long as possible fixing some bugs or doing enhancements which is great. I did not read those tho, don't have any details about it.

Copy link
Contributor

@mmoll mmoll left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I'm OK with this 👍

Copy link
Member

@lzap lzap left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I am glad, hope for the best changes in the future so we can keep using Hound. Thanks all!

@lzap lzap merged commit 8436d4e into theforeman:develop Nov 1, 2018
kgaikwad added a commit to kgaikwad/foreman that referenced this pull request Dec 21, 2019
With this commit, if "All users" is ticked then
locations and organizations are added to users. On edit user page,
you can not edit this taxonomy as they are disabled with tooltip
"Select all option enabled for this taxonomy".
kgaikwad added a commit to kgaikwad/foreman that referenced this pull request Dec 21, 2019
With this commit, if "All users" is ticked then
locations and organizations are added to users. On edit user page,
you can not edit this taxonomy as they are disabled with tooltip
"Select all option enabled for this taxonomy".
kgaikwad added a commit to kgaikwad/foreman that referenced this pull request Dec 21, 2019
With this commit, if "All users" is ticked then
locations and organizations are added to users. On edit user page,
you can not edit this taxonomy as they are disabled with tooltip
"Select all option enabled for this taxonomy".
kgaikwad added a commit to kgaikwad/foreman that referenced this pull request Dec 23, 2019
kgaikwad added a commit to kgaikwad/foreman that referenced this pull request Dec 23, 2019
kgaikwad added a commit to kgaikwad/foreman that referenced this pull request Jan 2, 2020
With this commit, if "All users" is ticked then
locations and organizations are added to users. On edit user page,
you can not edit this taxonomy as they are disabled with tooltip
"Select all option enabled for this taxonomy".
kgaikwad added a commit to kgaikwad/foreman that referenced this pull request Jan 2, 2020
kgaikwad added a commit to kgaikwad/foreman that referenced this pull request Apr 2, 2020
With this commit, if "All users" is ticked then
locations and organizations are added to users. On edit user page,
you can not edit this taxonomy as they are disabled with tooltip
"Select all option enabled for this taxonomy".
kgaikwad added a commit to kgaikwad/foreman that referenced this pull request Apr 2, 2020
kgaikwad added a commit to kgaikwad/foreman that referenced this pull request Apr 2, 2020
This pull request was closed.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

7 participants