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

fix govet issue and pin golangci-lint version for CI checks #112

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Aug 20, 2024
Merged

Conversation

tariq1890
Copy link
Contributor

This PR fixes a go vet lint issue which started to surface in the main branch on the latest golangci-lint version. Since we don't pin the version of golangci-lint in our GitHub action, there is no guarantee of CI check stability as the latest stable release of golangci-lint is always pulled at the time of running the CI. This PR solves this problem by pinning the version of golangc-lint so that the CI checks are stable and consistent

@klueska klueska merged commit 9935a38 into main Aug 20, 2024
9 checks passed
@tariq1890 tariq1890 deleted the fix-govet branch August 20, 2024 15:26
@cdesiniotis
Copy link
Contributor

@tariq1890 thanks for fixing this. I do see some benefits of using the latest version of golangci-lint in our CI -- 1) we do not need to maintain this version, and 2) we learn of new issues as golangci-lint is improved.

@tariq1890
Copy link
Contributor Author

I agree that unpinning the golangci-lint version helps us learn of new issues, however, I don't think it should cause CI failure. A CI failure should be a signal of a possibly bad change that is introduced through a changes directly introduced by the commit author. In this case, we are getting CI failures that don't pertain to any change introduced by a committer.

I think we should use a tool like dependabot or renovate-bot to automate the upgrade of golangci-lint in GitHub Actions files

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.

3 participants