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

[ANNOUNCEMENT] - Differential ShellCheck future architecture changes 🏗️ #71

Open
jamacku opened this issue Jul 22, 2022 · 3 comments
Assignees

Comments

@jamacku
Copy link
Member

jamacku commented Jul 22, 2022

Type of issue

Announcement

Description

In the future, we would like to implement other actions based on a similar philosophy as Differential ShellCheck.

Describe the solution you'd like

At the moment we are thinking about extracting some parts from the source code of Differential ShellCheck and making them standalone GitHub Actions. That would allow us to reduce the complexity of the code and lower the maintenance cost.

Good candidates for extractions are parts that compare log files (cswrap) and upload SARIF to GitHub. When extracted architecture could look something like this:

graph TD
    A[Differential ShellCheck action] -->|before.log and after.log| B[csgrep action]
    B -->|output.sarif| C[upload SARIF action]
Loading

Note: The end user will not notice this change once it is implemented in redhat-plumbers-in-action/differential-shellcheck@v4

@jamacku jamacku added this to the v3.0.0 milestone Jul 22, 2022
@jamacku jamacku self-assigned this Jul 22, 2022
@jamacku jamacku pinned this issue Jul 22, 2022
@lzaoral
Copy link
Member

lzaoral commented Jul 22, 2022

I think we could combine the last two steps into a single action. We already do that in differential-shellcheck.

@jamacku
Copy link
Member Author

jamacku commented Jul 22, 2022

Hmm, I was thinking that cswrap action could generate more output types, not only SARIF. But in general it's possible to merge them together.

@lzaoral
Copy link
Member

lzaoral commented Jul 22, 2022

I didn't think of that usecase, that definitely sounds useful. I'd still lean to having a single action (maybe combining these two?) to process the results, though, as that seems more user friendly to me.

@jamacku jamacku unpinned this issue Aug 4, 2022
@jamacku jamacku modified the milestones: v3.0.0, v4.0.0 Aug 17, 2022
@jamacku jamacku changed the title [ANNOUNCEMENT] - Differential ShellCheck v3 architecture changes [ANNOUNCEMENT] - Differential ShellCheck v4 architecture changes 🏗️ Sep 3, 2022
@jamacku jamacku removed this from the v4.0.0 milestone Jan 15, 2023
@jamacku jamacku changed the title [ANNOUNCEMENT] - Differential ShellCheck v4 architecture changes 🏗️ [ANNOUNCEMENT] - Differential ShellCheck future architecture changes 🏗️ Apr 7, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants