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 actionlint workflow #158

Open
wants to merge 8 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from
Open

Add actionlint workflow #158

wants to merge 8 commits into from

Conversation

tyrann0us
Copy link
Member

Please check if the PR fulfills these requirements

  • The commit message follows our guidelines
  • Tests for the changes have been added (for bug fixes/features)
  • Docs have been added/updated (for bug fixes/features)

What kind of change does this PR introduce? (Bug fix, feature, docs update, ...)
Feature

What is the current behavior? (You can also link to an open issue here)
Workflow files are not checked and may contain syntax errors.

What is the new behavior (if this is a feature change)?
All workflows files are checked with https://github.com/rhysd/actionlint.

Does this PR introduce a breaking change? (What changes might users need to make in their application due to this PR?)

Other information:
Fixes #139
This is not an internal workflow but should be consumable by calling workflows.

Signed-off-by: Philipp Bammes <8144115+tyrann0us@users.noreply.github.com>
@tyrann0us
Copy link
Member Author

tyrann0us commented Sep 10, 2024

PR checks are failing because of rhysd/actionlint#447.
Edit: This is fixed in a newer version of actionlint.

tyrann0us and others added 6 commits September 10, 2024 17:19
Signed-off-by: Philipp Bammes <8144115+tyrann0us@users.noreply.github.com>
This triggers a lot of errors in the `run:` steps, but this does not run reliably for all files, making the results unreliably. Also, some of reported errors are false positives, caused by how actionlint invokes shellcheck on the commands.
@tyrann0us tyrann0us marked this pull request as ready for review September 25, 2024 13:13
@tyrann0us tyrann0us requested a review from a team September 25, 2024 13:13
Copy link
Contributor

@shvlv shvlv left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Do I understand correctly that the workflow is bi-purposed: for our internal lint and for consuming as a reusable one? If so, should we add the documentation for consumers? Maybe there is not much to say, but still...

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.

[Bug]: Check workflows
3 participants