+1 to adding this. Given it has a low false-positive rate, only checks on code
actually changed in the PR and runs quickly compared to some of our other steps
that already happen for every PR, this seems like an easy decision.
From: Robert Houghton
Sent: Thursda
Short answer would be to work with the rest of the community to get the check
to pass, fix the LGTM configuration, something like that. Otherwise, the
Concourse CI has the ability to set PR context messages.
-Robert
From: Owen Nichols
Date: Thursday, December 16, 2021 at 10:40 AM
To: dev@geode
Build Update for apache/geode-examples
-
Build: #655
Status: Errored
Duration: 1 min and 5 secs
Commit: b760ba6 (rel/v1.13.6)
Author: Owen Nichols
Message: Bumping version to 1.13.6
View the changeset: https://github.com/apache/geode-examples/compare/rel/v1.13
Build Update for apache/geode-examples
-
Build: #657
Status: Errored
Duration: 48 secs
Commit: bb8a717 (rel/v1.14.2)
Author: Owen Nichols
Message: Bumping version to 1.14.2
View the changeset: https://github.com/apache/geode-examples/compare/rel/v1.14.2
View
Build Update for apache/geode-examples
-
Build: #659
Status: Errored
Duration: 51 secs
Commit: 7c15c4a (master)
Author: Owen Nichols
Message: Replacing master with contents of rel/v1.14.2
View the changeset:
https://github.com/apache/geode-examples/compare/0e
This is related to the earlier discussion about the kafka connector. This code
was already linked from the confluent hub, but I want to make sure we're in
compliance with the apache release policy.
To create this release, I took the source code and binaries Naba mentioned and
compared them with
Hello Geode Dev Community,
This is a release candidate for Apache Geode Kafka Connector version 1.1.0.
This contains a bump to log4j 2.16.
Please do a review and give your feedback, including the checks you performed.
Voting deadline:
3PM PST Monday, December 20 2021.
Please note that we are v
Requiring LGTM looks good to me. It does not seem to have a high rate of
false-positives like some other linters, but if we are making it gating, what
would the process look like to override a false-positive?
On 12/16/21, 10:37 AM, "Anthony Baker" wrote:
Thanks Robert, I think this is im
Thanks Robert, I think this is important. I think this is a good first step.
In future I think we should consider adding a CI job to ensure that
pre-existing security errors are addressed. Perhaps GitHub code scanning is
worth investigating since they have acquired the LGTM product.
Anthony
Excuse me. I meant to link the PR that would enable this behavior:
https://github.com/apache/geode/pull/7197
-Robert Houghton
From: Robert Houghton
Date: Thursday, December 16, 2021 at 10:08 AM
To: geode
Subject: [DISCUSS] Adding LTGM as gating PR checks
We have had LGTM tests enabled on Apach
We have had LGTM tests enabled on Apache Geode PRs for quite some time, and
have done a great job of trending those warnings and errors to in the right
direction. I would like to make the change to our GitHub to make those changes
blocking for all new PRs, given their reliability and lack-of-fla
11 matches
Mail list logo