Use updatecli@main config as a fallback #1342
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Signed-off-by: Josh Soref <2119212+jsoref@users.noreply.github.com>
Thank you for the contribution |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Sets the fallback for check-spelling for when it can't find its configuration.
Test
To test this pull request, you can run the following commands:
Refresh a currently unhappy PR (e.g. #1319)
Additional Information
When someone creates a PR from before check-spelling (v0.0.21) has been added, check-spelling doesn't have access to its configuration (unless you tell it what fallback to use). Using the
mainbranch is a pretty sound fallback (any future branches for releases will almost certainly be long past the addition of check-spelling), and I don't expect someone to be creating a PR from before the addition of check-spelling into a branch with check-spelling.Tradeoff
It looks a bit odd
Potential improvement
I should have caught that the value wasn't quite right, sorry, I'm human :).
In a future version of check spelling, I hope that check-spelling won't be confused and lose track of its configuration. I can't remember if I've fixed this, but I'll definitely make an effort to ensure the behavior is reasonable.