Exit with exit code 1 if a rule violation was found #35
Conversation
This file contains 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
faern
force-pushed
the
non-zero-exit-code-on-error
branch
from
6277263 to
549f6bd
Compare
gregoire-mullvad
approved these changes
Nov 29, 2024
faern
force-pushed
the
non-zero-exit-code-on-error
branch
from
549f6bd to
2fb2764
Compare
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
This PR builds on top of #31 and must be merged after that PR.
Since the main use case for this tool is to run in CI and other automated pipelines, it must have some easy to use way of notifying upstream that it found an error! Without this, it becomes much harder to detect if the tool failed or not.
This check is not perfect. We might want to exit with a non-zero exit code in more cases. Such as on parsing errors etc. But I leave that as a future exercise, this is way better than before at least. I leave the rest for later also partially because I think we need to improve the error handling situation overall. Currently there is no way for the
mainfunction to know if a specific scan failed in a specific way.