Stop naming a ruleset and a required check this repository does not have - #154
Merged
Conversation
The dependency-review job explained why it carries no `name:` by naming a "Protect main" ruleset whose required status check matches the literal check-run name. There is one ruleset here, it is called `gate`, and it requires no status check at all, so nothing was standing behind that job for a rename to break. The advice survives and the reason for it changes. Setting a `name:` still moves the check-run name, and #26 is the open issue that requires these literal names on `main` once they exist. What the comment now says is that no rule reads the name today, which is why a rename made before #26 lands is one nothing reports. Prevents a reader taking that paragraph as a description of the repository's configuration, which is the more expensive kind of wrong here because a ruleset is not in the tree and nobody checks a claim about one against the API. Found by reading every comment line in the directory after 60c6e01, rather than grepping for the phrases already known, which is how the two closes before this one each left a site standing. Closes #151 Signed-off-by: Nils Lehnen <30603423+iderex@users.noreply.github.com>
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
The issue this belongs to
Closes #151
What changed
.github/workflows/dependency-review.ymlexplained why its job carries noname:by naming a "Protect main" ruleset whose required status check matchesthe literal check-run name. There is one ruleset on this repository, it is called
gate, and it requires no status check, so nothing was standing behind that jobfor a rename to break.
The advice is kept and its reason is corrected. Setting a
name:still moves thecheck-run name, and the comment now says that no rule reads that name today and
names #26 as where the names are required on
mainonce they exist.Comments only. No trigger, permission, step or action moved.
What failure it prevents
A reader takes that paragraph as a description of the repository's configuration.
This is the more expensive kind of wrong in that directory, because a ruleset is
not in the tree: somebody checking a claim about a file opens the file, and
nobody checks a claim about a ruleset against the API.
It is also the third site of one defect, and the sweep that found it is written
into #151 along with why the two closes before it each left something standing.
Evidence
At the commit being pushed,
0ed29704bac25ab8bccafba93776658519597571.The sentence is gone:
What the repository actually carries, which is what the comment now describes:
Every reference under that directory, in shape rather than in literal, because
the hygiene check reads a literal in this body as an issue here:
Five bare references and every one resolves here. The one added by this change is
the first in that list.
The YAML still parses, which is the one thing a comment edit can break:
The two checks that run on this machine:
What this does not cover
This changes no ruleset and asks for none. #26 is where a required check name is
written down, and it is open.
Two sentences in that directory were read and deliberately left, and #151 carries
both with the reason.
zizmor.ymlforbids restoring a cache in a job thatpublishes a release, which forbids rather than asserts.
unicode-guard.ymlexplains a byte-order mark exemption by naming a kind of file that exists in the
world rather than in this tree.
Still no check refuses any of this. The document check reads Markdown and prints
on every run that it read nothing else. What found all three sites was somebody
reading the directory, and the two earlier closes are what that method costs when
it is done as a search instead.
Neither zizmor nor Scorecard was run on this machine. Neither tool is installed
here and I installed neither.
Who has read it
Nobody other than me. The evidence above stands in place of a second reader
rather than the question being left open.