Genuineh commented on PR #3024: URL: https://github.com/apache/kvrocks/pull/3024#issuecomment-3044506375
> > @git-hulk Thank you for your patient reply. For this type of situation, can we adopt a unified strategy to mark such changes, such as creating special folders or using special naming conventions? At the same time, it can be specified in the document which processes can be skipped for those with this feature, and possible solutions can be prompted when CI checks fail. This can reduce unnecessary mental burden and avoid the need to modify the CI code because of this. My current personal suggestion is to use special naming conventions, which can maintain the original project structure while ensuring good flexibility and scalability. > > Sorry for the late reply. I believe it's just a temporary workaround to pass the CI when introducing the typo check action. For the new code, I prefer changing values over excluding the new file. I also strongly support such a proposal on the premise that these special cases can be corrected. -- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: [email protected]
