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

Add goimports as a managed tool via bingo #1523

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

bentito
Copy link
Contributor

@bentito bentito commented Dec 20, 2024

Description of the change:
Add goimports as a managed tool via bingo

Motivation for the change:
Other needed dev tools are installed via bingo, goimports should be too.

Reviewer Checklist

  • Implementation matches the proposed design, or proposal is updated to match implementation
  • Sufficient unit test coverage
  • Sufficient end-to-end test coverage
  • Docs updated or added to /docs
  • Commit messages sensible and descriptive

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot requested review from anik120 and njhale December 20, 2024 17:20
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Dec 20, 2024

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: bentito
Once this PR has been reviewed and has the lgtm label, please assign grokspawn for approval. For more information see the Code Review Process.

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

@grokspawn
Copy link
Contributor

grokspawn commented Dec 20, 2024

I'll have to do a more thorough review later. Initial thoughts:

  • in other o-f projects, we have migrated away from goimports to gosimports and now gci, c.f. operator-controller and we should be consistent.
  • the lint target here doesn't actually lint anything??????????? Can we do something like operator-controller here again, and at least see how bad the lint is if we ran it?

I know this one looked like a quick-touch, but it seems more like an iceberg.
And if you want to capture ^^ in a new issue/PR, please write it up and add the reference here, and we can just use this one to idiot-proof our CI around the existing tooling.

Copy link

codecov bot commented Dec 20, 2024

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 46.80%. Comparing base (a0a503e) to head (028498c).

Additional details and impacted files
@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##           master    #1523   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   46.80%   46.80%           
=======================================
  Files         135      135           
  Lines       15760    15760           
=======================================
  Hits         7377     7377           
  Misses       7342     7342           
  Partials     1041     1041           

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

@bentito
Copy link
Contributor Author

bentito commented Dec 20, 2024

well we can close this one if we've got plans to make things better, later.

@grokspawn
Copy link
Contributor

grokspawn commented Dec 21, 2024

Yeah, let's close this one in favor of #1524. It's a PITA (over 300 linter findings!) but it would un-do this PR entirely.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants