Linter PR 3: enable additional linters #589
Conversation
|
@webmaster128 please check this out, as well as the other, related pull requests. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Not a full review.
I am interested in the linters (and the fixes that make them happy), but there are lots of unrelated changes in here that need to be discussed. I would appreciate if we keep these in separate PRs, so they don't block the us from merging the linters.
|
Hey, I hope I was sufficiently clear, I was writing from mobile before. @webmaster128 asked for smaller PRs. This is the largest of them. You'd want to review:
Before this one -- as for your review comments, thanks! I will resolve issues with this PR shortly, but will remind that I was explicitly asked to make smaller PRs after a PR had sat for about 2 years. And to be real, if the linters were interesting, I think it would not have sat for two years. |
faddat
changed the title
|
So personally I believe that it would be a good thing to force users to bump, but I will revert that change. I think that every chain should strictly use the latest go at every state breaking change. I just saw a similar mention in the SDK repository, but yeah I will just revert that here. And really good catch on the unresolved conflict. I'll resolve that too |
|
Any other outstanding items here? It's been sitting for >2mos and is really just very basic maintenance. |
|
It's been sitting for >3mos and is really just very basic maintenance. If that is not a priority, please simply state that, and I will de-prioritize it also. |
|
This is really puzzling to me. Is there anything wrong with the code? |
This pull request adds additional linters and works towards a more ideal configuration for the linter.
This is the most completely linted version. Before reviewing this, I do recommend that you review The pull requests that are in the style requested by @webmaster128
He asked for multiple PRS, each enabling more linters. This is the last of them.