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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

Refactor output writer #514

Merged
merged 53 commits into from
Oct 16, 2023
Merged

Refactor output writer #514

merged 53 commits into from
Oct 16, 2023

Conversation

attiasas
Copy link
Contributor

@attiasas attiasas commented Sep 21, 2023 •
edited
Loading

  • All tests passed. If this feature is not already covered by the tests, I added new tests.
  • This pull request is on the dev branch.
  • I used gofmt for formatting the code before submitting the pull request.

  • Refactor output writer and combine similar methods and operations.

  • Refactor output-related tests, combining similar tests

  • adding test cover on outputwriter package

  • fix bugs discovered in content

  • combine handling comments and their content

@attiasas attiasas added the ignore for release Automatically generated release notes label Sep 21, 2023
@attiasas attiasas added the safe to test Approve running integration tests on a pull request label Sep 27, 2023
@github-actions github-actions bot removed the safe to test Approve running integration tests on a pull request label Sep 27, 2023
@attiasas attiasas added the safe to test Approve running integration tests on a pull request label Sep 28, 2023
@github-actions github-actions bot removed the safe to test Approve running integration tests on a pull request label Sep 28, 2023
@attiasas attiasas added the safe to test Approve running integration tests on a pull request label Sep 28, 2023
@github-actions github-actions bot removed the safe to test Approve running integration tests on a pull request label Sep 28, 2023
@github-actions github-actions bot removed the safe to test Approve running integration tests on a pull request label Oct 10, 2023
@attiasas attiasas added the safe to test Approve running integration tests on a pull request label Oct 10, 2023
@github-actions github-actions bot removed the safe to test Approve running integration tests on a pull request label Oct 10, 2023
@attiasas attiasas added the safe to test Approve running integration tests on a pull request label Oct 10, 2023
@github-actions github-actions bot removed the safe to test Approve running integration tests on a pull request label Oct 10, 2023
@attiasas attiasas added the safe to test Approve running integration tests on a pull request label Oct 11, 2023
@github-actions github-actions bot removed the safe to test Approve running integration tests on a pull request label Oct 11, 2023
@attiasas attiasas added the safe to test Approve running integration tests on a pull request label Oct 11, 2023
@github-actions github-actions bot removed the safe to test Approve running integration tests on a pull request label Oct 11, 2023
@attiasas attiasas requested review from eyalbe4 and omerzi October 12, 2023 07:45
yahavi
yahavi requested changes Oct 15, 2023
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@yahavi yahavi left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Big like @attiasas!
Please consider my comments.

scanpullrequest/scanpullrequest_test.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
utils/comment.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
utils/comment.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
utils/comment_test.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
utils/comment_test.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
utils/outputwriter/outputcontent.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
utils/outputwriter/outputcontent_test.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
utils/outputwriter/simplifiedoutput_test.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
utils/outputwriter/standardoutput.go Show resolved Hide resolved
utils/outputwriter/standardoutput.go
@@ -5,7 +5,6 @@ import (
"strings"

"github.com/jfrog/froggit-go/vcsutils"
"github.com/jfrog/jfrog-cli-core/v2/xray/formats"
)

type StandardOutput struct {
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

StandardOutput is not the best name IMO.
I suggest renaming it to "DecoratedOutput".

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@yahavi, I believe "StandardOutput" is a more fitting term. This is a Markdown interface, and "Standard" implies that it adheres to all the available features in Markdown, essentially representing the expected output. So, in my view, it's not just a decoration but rather the standard output in Markdown.

@attiasas attiasas added the safe to test Approve running integration tests on a pull request label Oct 16, 2023
@github-actions github-actions bot removed the safe to test Approve running integration tests on a pull request label Oct 16, 2023
@github-actions
Copy link
Contributor

@attiasas attiasas merged commit 58364ba into jfrog:dev Oct 16, 2023
22 of 23 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@yahavi yahavi yahavi requested changes

@sverdlov93 sverdlov93 Awaiting requested review from sverdlov93

@eyalbe4 eyalbe4 Awaiting requested review from eyalbe4

@omerzi omerzi Awaiting requested review from omerzi

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
ignore for release Automatically generated release notes
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
2 participants
@attiasas @yahavi