v0.45 Updates

[dedavis6797]

Summary of the Pull Request

Readme updates for improvements added in v0.45.

Contributor License Agreement (CLA)

A CLA must be signed. If not, go over here and sign the CLA.

[github-actions]

@check-spelling-bot Report

Unrecognized words, please review:

• announcint
• dchristensen
• ianjoneill
• jakeoeding
• KERNELBASE
• Prioritization
• truely
• unmuting

Previously acknowledged words that are now absent

Accessible chrisharris coc djsoref dogancelik estdir Fody ftps gmx htt inprivate itsme mfreadwrite mfuuid Nefario nitroin null nunit Radiobuttons sidepanel spamming systray ulazy xia XSmall xunit

Some files were were automatically ignored

These sample patterns would exclude them:

^src/modules/previewpane/UnitTests-MarkdownPreviewHandler/HelperFiles/MarkdownWithHTMLImageTag\.txt$

You should consider adding them to:

.github/actions/spell-check/excludes.txt

File matching is via Perl regular expressions.

To check these files, more of their words need to be in the dictionary than not. You can use patterns.txt to exclude portions, add items to the dictionary (e.g. by adding them to allow.txt), or fix typos.

To accept these unrecognized words as correct (and remove the previously acknowledged and now absent words), run the following commands

... in a clone of the git@github.com:microsoft/PowerToys.git repository
on the dedavis/v0.45-Updates branch:

update_files() {
perl -e '
my @expect_files=qw('".github/actions/spell-check/expect.txt"');
@ARGV=@expect_files;
my @stale=qw('"$patch_remove"');
my $re=join "|", @stale;
my $suffix=".".time();
my $previous="";
sub maybe_unlink { unlink($_[0]) if $_[0]; }
while (<>) {
if ($ARGV ne $old_argv) { maybe_unlink($previous); $previous="$ARGV$suffix"; rename($ARGV, $previous); open(ARGV_OUT, ">$ARGV"); select(ARGV_OUT); $old_argv = $ARGV; }
next if /^(?:$re)(?:(?:\r|\n)*$| .*)/; print;
}; maybe_unlink($previous);'
perl -e '
my $new_expect_file=".github/actions/spell-check/expect.txt";
use File::Path qw(make_path);
use File::Basename qw(dirname);
make_path (dirname($new_expect_file));
open FILE, q{<}, $new_expect_file; chomp(my @words = <FILE>); close FILE;
my @add=qw('"$patch_add"');
my %items; @items{@words} = @words x (1); @items{@add} = @add x (1);
@words = sort {lc($a)."-".$a cmp lc($b)."-".$b} keys %items;
open FILE, q{>}, $new_expect_file; for my $word (@words) { print FILE "$word\n" if $word =~ /\w/; };
close FILE;
system("git", "add", $new_expect_file);
'
(cat '.github/actions/spell-check/excludes.txt' - <<EOF
$should_exclude_patterns
EOF
) |grep .|
sort -f |
uniq > '.github/actions/spell-check/excludes.txt.temp' &&
mv '.github/actions/spell-check/excludes.txt.temp' '.github/actions/spell-check/excludes.txt'
}

comment_json=$(mktemp)
curl -L -s -S \
  --header "Content-Type: application/json" \
  "https://api.github.com/repos/microsoft/PowerToys/issues/comments/910673351" > "$comment_json"
comment_body=$(mktemp)
jq -r .body < "$comment_json" > $comment_body
rm $comment_json

patch_remove=$(perl -ne 'next unless s{^</summary>(.*)</details>$}{$1}; print' < "$comment_body")
  

patch_add=$(perl -e '$/=undef;
$_=<>;
s{<details>.*}{}s;
s{^#.*}{};
s{\n##.*}{};
s{(?:^|\n)\s*\*}{}g;
s{\s+}{ }g;
print' < "$comment_body")
  

should_exclude_patterns=$(perl -e '$/=undef;
$_=<>;
exit unless s{(?:You should consider excluding directory paths|You should consider adding them to).*}{}s;
s{.*These sample patterns would exclude them:}{}s;
s{.*\`\`\`([^`]*)\`\`\`.*}{$1}m;
print' < "$comment_body" | grep . || true)

update_files
rm $comment_body
git add -u

If you see a bunch of garbage

If it relates to a ...

well-formed pattern

See if there's a pattern that would match it.

If not, try writing one and adding it to the patterns.txt file.

Patterns are Perl 5 Regular Expressions - you can test yours before committing to verify it will match your lines.

Note that patterns can't match multiline strings.

binary-ish string

Please add a file path to the excludes.txt file instead of just accepting the garbage.

File paths are Perl 5 Regular Expressions - you can test yours before committing to verify it will match your files.

^ refers to the file's path from the root of the repository, so ^README\.md$ would exclude README.md (on whichever branch you're using).

[github-actions]

@check-spelling-bot Report

Unrecognized words, please review:

• ianjoneill

Previously acknowledged words that are now absent

Accessible chrisharris coc djsoref dogancelik estdir Fody ftps gmx htt inprivate itsme mfreadwrite mfuuid Nefario nitroin null nunit Radiobuttons sidepanel spamming systray ulazy xia XSmall xunit

Some files were were automatically ignored

These sample patterns would exclude them:

^src/modules/previewpane/UnitTests-MarkdownPreviewHandler/HelperFiles/MarkdownWithHTMLImageTag\.txt$

You should consider adding them to:

.github/actions/spell-check/excludes.txt

File matching is via Perl regular expressions.

To check these files, more of their words need to be in the dictionary than not. You can use patterns.txt to exclude portions, add items to the dictionary (e.g. by adding them to allow.txt), or fix typos.

To accept these unrecognized words as correct (and remove the previously acknowledged and now absent words), run the following commands

... in a clone of the git@github.com:microsoft/PowerToys.git repository
on the dedavis/v0.45-Updates branch:

update_files() {
perl -e '
my @expect_files=qw('".github/actions/spell-check/expect.txt"');
@ARGV=@expect_files;
my @stale=qw('"$patch_remove"');
my $re=join "|", @stale;
my $suffix=".".time();
my $previous="";
sub maybe_unlink { unlink($_[0]) if $_[0]; }
while (<>) {
if ($ARGV ne $old_argv) { maybe_unlink($previous); $previous="$ARGV$suffix"; rename($ARGV, $previous); open(ARGV_OUT, ">$ARGV"); select(ARGV_OUT); $old_argv = $ARGV; }
next if /^(?:$re)(?:(?:\r|\n)*$| .*)/; print;
}; maybe_unlink($previous);'
perl -e '
my $new_expect_file=".github/actions/spell-check/expect.txt";
use File::Path qw(make_path);
use File::Basename qw(dirname);
make_path (dirname($new_expect_file));
open FILE, q{<}, $new_expect_file; chomp(my @words = <FILE>); close FILE;
my @add=qw('"$patch_add"');
my %items; @items{@words} = @words x (1); @items{@add} = @add x (1);
@words = sort {lc($a)."-".$a cmp lc($b)."-".$b} keys %items;
open FILE, q{>}, $new_expect_file; for my $word (@words) { print FILE "$word\n" if $word =~ /\w/; };
close FILE;
system("git", "add", $new_expect_file);
'
(cat '.github/actions/spell-check/excludes.txt' - <<EOF
$should_exclude_patterns
EOF
) |grep .|
sort -f |
uniq > '.github/actions/spell-check/excludes.txt.temp' &&
mv '.github/actions/spell-check/excludes.txt.temp' '.github/actions/spell-check/excludes.txt'
}

comment_json=$(mktemp)
curl -L -s -S \
  --header "Content-Type: application/json" \
  "https://api.github.com/repos/microsoft/PowerToys/issues/comments/910740921" > "$comment_json"
comment_body=$(mktemp)
jq -r .body < "$comment_json" > $comment_body
rm $comment_json

patch_remove=$(perl -ne 'next unless s{^</summary>(.*)</details>$}{$1}; print' < "$comment_body")
  

patch_add=$(perl -e '$/=undef;
$_=<>;
s{<details>.*}{}s;
s{^#.*}{};
s{\n##.*}{};
s{(?:^|\n)\s*\*}{}g;
s{\s+}{ }g;
print' < "$comment_body")
  

should_exclude_patterns=$(perl -e '$/=undef;
$_=<>;
exit unless s{(?:You should consider excluding directory paths|You should consider adding them to).*}{}s;
s{.*These sample patterns would exclude them:}{}s;
s{.*\`\`\`([^`]*)\`\`\`.*}{$1}m;
print' < "$comment_body" | grep . || true)

update_files
rm $comment_body
git add -u

If you see a bunch of garbage

If it relates to a ...

well-formed pattern

See if there's a pattern that would match it.

If not, try writing one and adding it to the patterns.txt file.

Patterns are Perl 5 Regular Expressions - you can test yours before committing to verify it will match your lines.

Note that patterns can't match multiline strings.

binary-ish string

Please add a file path to the excludes.txt file instead of just accepting the garbage.

File paths are Perl 5 Regular Expressions - you can test yours before committing to verify it will match your files.

^ refers to the file's path from the root of the repository, so ^README\.md$ would exclude README.md (on whichever branch you're using).

[Jay-o-Way]

Obviously, the new style is a huge update and I can't wait to use it. Although @niels9001 is the one who makes this possible in the end, there are many others who actually opened issues. 100% respect for Niels, but please pass some around?

[dedavis6797]

That's a fair point, I didn't want to inundate the readme with several callouts on each line, but I tried to capture everyone who contributed meaningfully to the release in the community contributions section, reserving the inline call-out for the members who wrote the code to enable the functionality.

If I missed anything that a community member did in particular, please let me know so I can accurately give credit to them!

[Jay-o-Way]

Well, of you want a specific example... I did choose this point consciously, because I was bugging about the mdl2 icons (and the inconsistency) even before Niels agreed it would be better to use the colored ones. But I don't want it to be about me. And indeed, Niels is the one who done the hard work.

[crutkas]

Lets make sure we ship the 0.46 release on time. Lets roll out a test build tomorrow

[Aaron-Junker]

Just for saying: When we don't change the shortcut guide behaviour (#11963), users will go furious. There are already many users which are using older PowerToys versions because of this (which is also a security risk).

[Aaron-Junker]

We should group settings changelog in an own section. Not in general. And I think adding a picture or a gif of the new settings would be nice.

[crutkas]

@Aaron-Junker The readme does state we'd look into it for next release (.47) and #11963 was never commit to in .45 (partly due to me being out)

[Jay-o-Way]

We should group settings changelog in an own section. Not in general. And I think adding a picture or a gif of the new settings would be nice.

Yes, totally agree. Then my earlier comments can/will be addressed along with it. One big section to focus on (and indeed show) the new style update, with a few smaller mentions to more specific details. As we pointed out: Not every small/internal issue (or pr) needs to be mentioned. One big @mention and a 💙 for Niels, combined with specific @mentions for other people, when appropriate.

[Jay-o-Way]

(partly due to me being out)

welcome back @crutkas we missed you!

[htcfreek]

LGTM

Resolved