Skip to content

workflows: shellcheck: Expand vendor ignore #10990

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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom
Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Mar 12, 2025
Merged

workflows: shellcheck: Expand vendor ignore #10990

merged 1 commit into from
Mar 12, 2025

Conversation

stevenhorsman
Copy link
Member

  • In the previous PR I only skipped the runtime/vendor directory, but errors are showing up in other vendor packages, so try a wildcard skip
  • Also update the job step was we can distinguish between the required and non-required versions

@stevenhorsman
workflows: shellcheck: Expand vendor ignore
ee0f0b7 
- In the previous PR I only skipped the runtime/vendor
directory, but errors are showing up in other vendor
packages, so try a wildcard skip
- Also update the job step was we can distinguish between the
required and non-required versions

Signed-off-by: stevenhorsman <steven@uk.ibm.com>
@katacontainersbot katacontainersbot added the size/tiny Smallest and simplest task label Mar 6, 2025
@stevenhorsman
Copy link
Member Author

Tested on a topic branch https://github.com/kata-containers/kata-containers/actions/runs/13701220554/job/38315254764 and https://github.com/kata-containers/kata-containers/actions/runs/13701224374/job/38315268003 which shows no vendor paths being found.

@stevenhorsman stevenhorsman mentioned this pull request Mar 6, 2025
Open
11 tasks
RuoqingHe
RuoqingHe approved these changes Mar 6, 2025
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@RuoqingHe RuoqingHe left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM, thanks @stevenhorsman 😉

@sprt
Copy link
Contributor

sprt commented Mar 6, 2025

Tested on a topic branch https://github.com/kata-containers/kata-containers/actions/runs/13701220554/job/38315254764 and https://github.com/kata-containers/kata-containers/actions/runs/13701224374/job/38315268003 which shows no vendor paths being found.

No need to do this since shellcheck is triggered by the pull_request event (in feature branch), right? 🙂

@stevenhorsman
Copy link
Member Author

Tested on a topic branch https://github.com/kata-containers/kata-containers/actions/runs/13701220554/job/38315254764 and https://github.com/kata-containers/kata-containers/actions/runs/13701224374/job/38315268003 which shows no vendor paths being found.

No need to do this since shellcheck is triggered by the pull_request event (in feature branch), right? 🙂

You are absolutely right!

@RuoqingHe RuoqingHe merged commit 386fed3 into main Mar 12, 2025
338 of 358 checks passed
@stevenhorsman stevenhorsman deleted the shell-check-vendor-skip branch March 12, 2025 13:42
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@sprt sprt sprt approved these changes

@RuoqingHe RuoqingHe RuoqingHe approved these changes

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
ok-to-test size/tiny Smallest and simplest task
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
4 participants
@stevenhorsman @sprt @RuoqingHe @katacontainersbot