-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 134
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
docs: Add all md files in root dir to linkchecker #1461
Conversation
@@ -1,135 +0,0 @@ | |||
# Differential testing for Interchain Security 'core' protocol | |||
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This README is obsolote very soon (https://github.com/cosmos/interchain-security/blob/df7ea65610458eaf964bbaf75f7a00b8003f89bf/tests/mbt/README.md), so I just deleted it instead of going through and fixing the links.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
We should ignore the .changelog folder when we check .md links. We already check the results, i.e., CHANGELOG.md
.
.changelog/epilogue.md
Outdated
@@ -64,9 +64,9 @@ Date: June 1st, 2023 | |||
|
|||
Unlike prior releases, the ICS `v2.0.0` release will be based on the main branch. `v2.0.0` will contain all the accumulated PRs from the various releases below, along with other PRs that were merged, but not released to production. After `v2.0.0`, we plan to revamp release practices, and how we modularize the repo for consumer/provider. | |||
|
|||
Upgrading a provider from `v1.1.0-multiden` to `v2.0.0` will require state migrations. See [migration.go](./x/ccv/provider/keeper/migration.go). See the provider module's `ConsensusVersion` in [module](./x/ccv/provider/module.go) | |||
Upgrading a provider from `v1.1.0-multiden` to `v2.0.0` will require state migrations. See [migration.go](../x/ccv/provider/keeper/migration.go). See the provider module's `ConsensusVersion` in [module](../x/ccv/provider/module.go) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This will end up in CHANGELOG.md
and then the links will be broken. You can test that by running unclog build > CHANGELOG.md
.
.github/workflows/linkchecker.yml
Outdated
# This is due to the markdown-link-check action | ||
# not having an exclude parameter, see | ||
# https://github.com/gaurav-nelson/github-action-markdown-link-check/issues/38 | ||
- name: Remove folders that we do not want to check |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Isn't this going to just remove an entire folder from the repo? See #1464 as a potential solution.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
It will remove it, but only in the context of this workflow - maybe I'm wrong, but your PR just changes the trigger for the workflow not to trigger on changes to .changelog, but the check still considers files in the .changelog folder when it triggers, right?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
In this PR, note the folder is only removed for this particular workflow, so it doesn't negatively impact other workflows
I adjusted this. This needs two separate jobs (which is not too bad, it helps diagnose errors slightly, but takes an extra line in the checks) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTM
This pull request sets up GitHub code scanning for this repository. Once the scans have completed and the checks have passed, the analysis results for this pull request branch will appear on this overview. Once you merge this pull request, the 'Security' tab will show more code scanning analysis results (for example, for the default branch). Depending on your configuration and choice of analysis tool, future pull requests will be annotated with code scanning analysis results. For more information about GitHub code scanning, check out the documentation. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTM (administrative approval)
Closed and will reopen due to technical reasons related to merge queue |
Description
Closes: N/A
Author Checklist
All items are required. Please add a note to the item if the item is not applicable and
please add links to any relevant follow up issues.
I have...
docs:
prefix in the PR titleReviewers Checklist
All items are required. Please add a note if the item is not applicable and please add
your handle next to the items reviewed if you only reviewed selected items.
I have...
docs:
prefix in the PR titlemake build-docs
)