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

tools: don't lint-md as part of main lint target #17587

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

refack
Copy link
Contributor

@refack refack commented Dec 10, 2017

Followup to #17320.
As per discussion in TSC Meeting from 2017-12-06 skip linting markdown files as part of the lint target.

Checklist
  • make -j4 test (UNIX), or vcbuild test (Windows) passes
  • commit message follows commit guidelines
Affected core subsystem(s)

tools,build

@nodejs-github-bot nodejs-github-bot added the build Issues and PRs related to build files or the CI. label Dec 10, 2017
@refack
Copy link
Contributor Author

refack commented Dec 10, 2017

#17330 will complement this change, in that is minimizes git noise even when running lint-md-build.

@refack
Copy link
Contributor Author

refack commented Dec 10, 2017

@refack refack added the tools Issues and PRs related to the tools directory. label Dec 10, 2017
@refack refack mentioned this pull request Dec 11, 2017
@BridgeAR
Copy link
Member

Hm, I would really like to find a good solution for this. I like the linter a lot. But oh well, I guess it is to run one more command for most PRs now.

@MylesBorins MylesBorins added the fast-track PRs that do not need to wait for 48 hours to land. label Dec 11, 2017
Copy link
Contributor

@MylesBorins MylesBorins left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM we should land asap

@MylesBorins
Copy link
Contributor

@BridgeAR this is a temporary solution while we figure out a better way to maintain dependencies inside of the tree (to avoid landing 2k new files in tree). I'm very much into getting a better solution together and bringing the linter back into the fray

@MylesBorins
Copy link
Contributor

landed in 51a7d97

MylesBorins pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Dec 11, 2017
PR-URL: #17587
Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <cjihrig@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Myles Borins <myles.borins@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Ruben Bridgewater <ruben@bridgewater.de>
MylesBorins pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Dec 12, 2017
PR-URL: #17587
Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <cjihrig@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Myles Borins <myles.borins@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Ruben Bridgewater <ruben@bridgewater.de>
MylesBorins pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Dec 12, 2017
PR-URL: #17587
Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <cjihrig@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Myles Borins <myles.borins@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Ruben Bridgewater <ruben@bridgewater.de>
@MylesBorins MylesBorins mentioned this pull request Dec 12, 2017
MylesBorins pushed a commit that referenced this pull request May 22, 2018
PR-URL: #17587
Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <cjihrig@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Myles Borins <myles.borins@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Ruben Bridgewater <ruben@bridgewater.de>
MylesBorins pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Jun 14, 2018
PR-URL: #17587
Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <cjihrig@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Myles Borins <myles.borins@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Ruben Bridgewater <ruben@bridgewater.de>
@MylesBorins MylesBorins mentioned this pull request Jul 9, 2018
@refack refack deleted the skip-lint-md branch July 13, 2018 15:54
rvagg pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Aug 16, 2018
PR-URL: #17587
Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <cjihrig@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Myles Borins <myles.borins@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Ruben Bridgewater <ruben@bridgewater.de>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
build Issues and PRs related to build files or the CI. fast-track PRs that do not need to wait for 48 hours to land. tools Issues and PRs related to the tools directory.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

6 participants