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

ci(security): Remove linting steps from GHA security workflow #5102

Merged

Conversation

agrski
Copy link
Contributor

@agrski agrski commented Aug 21, 2023

Why

Motivation

Currently, the security workflow for GitHub Actions has steps that perform linting for the scheduler/ and operator/ directories. The setup for this is not the same as for the linting action for PRs. As a result, it seems that while the PR workflows succeed, the security tests can fail on linting.

There is no need for these to perform linting in any case, precisely because this is done for every PR, so all the code merged into the v2 branch already meets linting requirements. Removing this additional step is therefore removing redundancy and also removing a source of inconsistency.

The inclusion of linting was questioned originally and included simply because it's what Core v1 does. I firmly believe this is redundant and can safely be removed.

What

Changes

  • Remove linting steps from GitHub Actions workflow.

Testing

N/A

@agrski agrski self-assigned this Aug 21, 2023
@agrski agrski marked this pull request as ready for review August 21, 2023 16:40
Copy link
Contributor

@jesse-c jesse-c left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM!

@agrski agrski merged commit f536b48 into SeldonIO:v2 Aug 21, 2023
4 of 5 checks passed
@agrski agrski deleted the remove-lint-step-from-ci-security-workflow branch August 21, 2023 23:42
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.

2 participants