chore!: rename ec to editorconfig-checker #371
Conversation
Why breaking: the archive name is depending on the archive name, downstream projects will probably need to adjust their build tooling.
Technically these tests are not affected by the change, but for consistency I think this is the right thing to do.
Codecov ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #371 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 84.89% 87.04% +2.15%
==========================================
Files 8 8
Lines 695 610 -85
==========================================
- Hits 590 531 -59
+ Misses 81 55 -26
Partials 24 24 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
|
Of cause! Please tell me if I missed any spot, I tried to be as thorough as possible, but could still have missed a spot. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
BREAKING CHANGE indeed, might be worth it, to avoid confusions, and avoid having too many way to execute the same binary.
What about .ecrc? Should the configuration file named .editorconfig-checkerrc? (might be a separate issue, but as it's a JSON file, we should support the file with the extension, so .editorconfig-checkerrc.json).
EDIT: Issue already open for JSON config: #306
Also, wrappers will need to be updated:
- chore!: rename
ectoeditorconfig-checkereditorconfig-checker.javascript#416 - chore!: rename
ectoeditorconfig-checkereditorconfig-checker.python#33 - chore!: rename
ectoeditorconfig-checkereditorconfig-checker.php#321
We had issues with releasing major version with Go from v2 to v3 (ref: #338), so we should not forgot to update it the same way as #339 did for v4 (of course in a separated PR).
We might first release v3.1.0 (hopefully with a automation), and then we'll see how to proceed with major version.
Blocking as "Request changes" for the moment.
theoludwig
changed the title
I commented #306 about this point. But let me sum up here, I think this PR is a good candidate for checking a new name in addition of .ecrc file I suggest It might not need to be addressed in this exact PR, but in another PR that will be added to the same release that where the binary name changes would be shipped) |
This is the replacement for #255
Still TODO: