chore: prettier action #2993
chore: prettier action #2993
Conversation
|
Important Auto Review SkippedAuto reviews are disabled on this repository. Please check the settings in the CodeRabbit UI or the To trigger a single review, invoke the Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media? TipsChatThere are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:
Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments. CodeRabbit Commands (invoked as PR comments)
Additionally, you can add CodeRabbit Configration File (
|
chandumlg
force-pushed
the
chore.prettier_action
branch
from
e4e0343 to
65c79a8
Compare
Codecov ReportAttention:
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## develop #2993 +/- ##
========================================
Coverage 87.18% 87.18%
========================================
Files 529 529
Lines 28659 28659
Branches 6824 6824
========================================
Hits 24985 24985
Misses 3340 3340
Partials 334 334 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
|
chandumlg
force-pushed
the
chore.prettier_action
branch
from
b0ec3e6 to
2c73b37
Compare
| ref: ${{ github.head_ref }} | ||
|
|
||
| - name: Prettify code | ||
| uses: creyD/[email protected] |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@saikumarrs I remember we had a pre-commit hook as well right?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@chandumlg, it's better we configure this action to run for only the changed files.
Additionally, we can run a scheduled cleanup action to create baseline.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yeah. Either run only for changed filed or fix all and then run on all.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Want to confirm one thing. This only checks if my source-code is not formatted along the lines that prettier has defined. Right ?!
What if there are lint failures & they somehow got committed ? They wouldn't be considered in this action right ?!
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yeah, we need another action for it. However, we can only flag but not automatically fix them.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actually there is a way in which you can run only one command(eslint) with rules from eslint & prettier(ofcourse by disabling eslint-formatter rules) & flag if you find some changes. I tried it in one of our repositories. It is working well
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Does it also update the files with corrected formatting? If yes, great!
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Closing this pr then @sanpj2292 . Let's have eslint do the formatting and linting.
chandumlg
force-pushed
the
chore.prettier_action
branch
from
dad52e5 to
26c9a78
Compare
|
What are the changes introduced in this PR?
Introduces prettier github action. The action will fail if there are any unprettified files. Commit the prettified files and see the action go green.
What is the related Linear task?
Resolves INT-1238
Please explain the objectives of your changes below
Put down any required details on the broader aspect of your changes. If there are any dependent changes, mandatorily mention them here
Any changes to existing capabilities/behaviour, mention the reason & what are the changes ?
N/A
Any new dependencies introduced with this change?
N/A
Any new generic utility introduced or modified. Please explain the changes.
N/A
Any technical or performance related pointers to consider with the change?
N/A
Developer checklist
My code follows the style guidelines of this project
No breaking changes are being introduced.
All related docs linked with the PR?
All changes manually tested?
Any documentation changes needed with this change?
Is the PR limited to 10 file changes?
Is the PR limited to one linear task?
Are relevant unit and component test-cases added?
Reviewer checklist
Is the type of change in the PR title appropriate as per the changes?
Verified that there are no credentials or confidential data exposed with the changes.