Run ecosystem checks with preview mode enabled#8358
Conversation
| chmod +x ./ruff ${{ steps.ruff-target.outputs.download-path }}/ruff | ||
|
|
||
| ruff-ecosystem check ./ruff ${{ steps.ruff-target.outputs.download-path }}/ruff --cache ./checkouts --output-format markdown | tee ecosystem-result-check | ||
| ruff-ecosystem check ./ruff ${{ steps.ruff-target.outputs.download-path }}/ruff --cache ./checkouts --output-format markdown --force-preview | tee ecosystem-result-check |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Alternatively, we could get fancy and set this flag if a pull request has the preview label. I'm not sure that's worth it.
zanieb
force-pushed
the
zanie/ecosystem-preview
branch
from
cc9e6bb to
0d2d79b
Compare
PR Check ResultsEcosystem✅ ecosystem check detected no linter changes. ✅ ecosystem check detected no format changes. |
charliermarsh
left a comment
charliermarsh
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I support this, probably worth getting @MichaReiser's take too.
|
I'm sure if I understand this change. Does it mean that we'll run the ecosystem checks in preview only? Or will we run the ecosystem checks in preview and normal mode? I believe running the ecosystem checks in non-preview mode helps identify unintentional breaking changes. For the formatter, I think we need to run both to assess if (even a preview only change) unintentionally breaks non-preview formatting AND in preview to assess how preview style changes formatting. |
|
While I would like to run both preview and not preview as described in #8076, until we implement that we gain more (in the linter, at least) from the ecosystem checks with preview enabled than not. Basically, this is a temporary solution that also moves us a step closer to supporting both outputs. My primary concern with naively enabling both preview and non-preview checks is that it doubles the amount of output we can display — and it already feels very constrained. |
MichaReiser
left a comment
MichaReiser
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Sounds reasonable for the inter, but I fear we need to invest a little more into the ecosystem check for us to implement changes with confidence.
For the formatter, the most important in my view, is to ensure we don't introduce unintentional changes to the stable style. Or we risk shipping breaking changes which are annoying for users. This is why I would prefer to run the ecosystem checks with stable style formatting.
I see it essential for implementing preview style successfully to have a way (at least locally) to run the ecosystem checks with preview style enabled. Could you document how this can be done in the CONTRIBUTION.md if it's not already the case? If you can find the time to make this work in CI during next month would be awesome, but I know that you've already planned a lot.
zanieb
force-pushed
the
zanie/ecosystem-preview
branch
from
0d2d79b to
e416750
Compare
Closes #8076 Follow-up to #8358 Doubles the amount of ecosystem checks we do, adding separate groups for the stable sections. We're likely to run into GitHub comment length restrictions if there are significant deviations. However, it should not be common for changes in stable and preview to occur at the same time, nor should it be common for linter and formatter changes to occur at the same time.
3 participants
Until #8076 is ready, it seems beneficial to get feedback on preview mode changes.
Tested locally, updated logs to output the flags passed to
ruffand verified--previewis used.