feat: lint files which are changed with strict rules

[devsargam]

What kind of change does this PR introduce?
feature

Issue Number:

Fixes #1427

Did you add tests for your changes?
No

Summary
Improved gh workflow to only check those files which are changed to lint

Does this PR introduce a breaking change?
Yes

Have you read the contributing guide?
Yes

[github-actions]

Our Pull Request Approval Process

We have these basic policies to make the approval process smoother for our volunteer team.

Testing Your Code

Please make sure your code passes all tests. Our test code coverage system will fail if these conditions occur:

1. The overall code coverage drops below the target threshold of the repository
2. Any file in the pull request has code coverage levels below the repository threshold
3. Merge conflicts

The process helps maintain the overall reliability of the code base and is a prerequisite for getting your PR approved. Assigned reviewers regularly review the PR queue and tend to focus on PRs that are passing.

Reviewers

When your PR has been assigned reviewers contact them to get your code reviewed and approved via:

1. comments in this PR or
2. our slack channel

Reviewing Your Code

Your reviewer(s) will have the following roles:

1. arbitrators of future discussions with other contributors about the validity of your changes
2. point of contact for evaluating the validity of your work
3. person who verifies matching issues by others that should be closed.
4. person who gives general guidance in fixing your tests

CONTRIBUTING.md

Read our CONTRIBUTING.md file. Most importantly:

1. PRs with issues not assigned to you will be closed by the reviewer
2. Fix the first comment in the PR so that each issue listed automatically closes

Other

1. 🎯 Please be considerate of our volunteers' time. Contacting the person who assigned the reviewers is not advised unless they ask for your input. Do not @ the person who did the assignment otherwise.
2. Read the CONTRIBUTING.md file make

[github-actions]

Congratulations on making your first PR! 🎊 If you haven't already, check out our Contributing Guidelines and PR Reporting Guidelines to ensure that you are following our guidelines for contributing and creating PR.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Comparison is base (c756a73) 96.23% compared to head (f3dcc84) 96.23%.
Report is 11 commits behind head on develop.

❗ Current head f3dcc84 differs from pull request most recent head d18dc6e. Consider uploading reports for the commit d18dc6e to get more accurate results

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff            @@
##           develop    #1523   +/-   ##
========================================
  Coverage    96.23%   96.23%           
========================================
  Files          133      133           
  Lines         3404     3404           
  Branches      1031     1031           
========================================
  Hits          3276     3276           
  Misses         123      123           
  Partials         5        5           

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[devsargam]

This pr needs to change the following files

• .eslintrc.json
• .github/workflows/pull-requests.yml

so, I'd request a maintainer to allow unauthorized file change in this pr

[devsargam]

hey @palisadoes can you please look into this?

[Cioppolo14]

@devsargam We are aware of an issue with UpdateUserInput, but for now can you update your schema file to pass the introspection test.

[Cioppolo14]

@EshaanAgg @sumitra19jha Can you review this PR?

[devsargam]

@devsargam We are aware of an issue with UpdateUserInput, but for now can you update your schema file to pass the introspection test.

Should I edit the schema file myself or is there a pr ongoing for that?

[Cioppolo14]

@devsargam We are aware of an issue with UpdateUserInput, but for now can you update your schema file to pass the introspection test.

Should I edit the schema file myself or is there a pr ongoing for that?

The fix was merged last night, so I think you just need to update your files.

[Cioppolo14]

@devsargam The recent merge will fix some of the introspection errors, but not all, you just need to manually add UpdateUserInput in schema and then it'll pass. I need to investigate further into this part.

[SiddheshKukade]

Why did you deleted the fields ?

[devsargam]

There was some problem with graphQL in the latest develop branch commit so, I had to copy the mutation from other from which tests were passing

[palisadoes]

1. You need to restore this and get the tests to pass in a valid way.
2. The fact that tests pass doesn't mean that they properly verify functionality.

[devsargam]

as mentioned in this #1525 (comment) should I follow the same statement or???

[palisadoes]

1. There have been many merged PRs since this one was opened. All their tests passed and the lines that you removed are maintained.
2. Please merge with the latest upstream, and fix your tests to comply with the code base. You are removing functionality that must be maintained

[devsargam]

Hey, mentors can someone help with this pr?

• First test is failing because I have changed files like .eslint and .github/workflows/*
• Second test is failing because of graphql schema conflict between our current repo and the api repo
• Third test is failing of some unknown linting reasons

How should I proceed can someone help?

[palisadoes]

1. @NamitBhutani could you provide some guidance?
2. You worked on something similar for the API PR process

[palisadoes]

Are you still working on this?

[devsargam]

Yes. I am facing errors on the graphql test

[devsargam]

Hye, @palisadoes sir, can I close this pr and open another one. I want to try a bit different approach & this pr also has merge conflicts

[palisadoes]

No.

1. Merge conflicts are a regular part of code development.
2. We lose track of the reviews history when you close the PR
3. The new approach will update the files to review when pushed you the PR

Create a new local branch with your new approach. Merge it into the branch for this PR when ready.

[palisadoes]

NOTE Read very carefully

1. We just merged this PR which upgraded the prettier package.
   1. Upgraded prettier from 2.3.2 to 3.2.5 #1599
2. It reformatted over 150 files.

This will put your PR at risk of extensive merge conflicts. Do the following IN THIS ORDER:

1. upgrade your prettier in your local branch to the same version
2. run prettier on your local branch
3. update your local branch with the latest upstream

This will help to reduce the number of existing and future merge conflicts for your PR.

[palisadoes]

Can you do the changes as suggested, or can you find no other way of solving the issue without a new PR?

[devsargam]

Sir, I tried doing it locally but it's pretty difficult as my branch is behind the latest develop by a lot. So, if possible can I release a new pr?

[palisadoes]

OK. Closing