"Chris. Webster via GitGitGadget" <gitgitgadget@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] Make `check-whitespace` failures more helpful People usually make changes to the system to make it "more useful" and/or "more helpful", and almost never to make it "less helpful". Phrases you would use to explain why the failures become more helpful with this change (compared to without) would help to promote it in the "git shortlog --no-merges" output for the next release. E.g. "make X failures stand out more", "make X failures gramatically correct", "show X failures more concisely", etc. > diff --git a/.github/workflows/check-whitespace.yml b/.github/workflows/check-whitespace.yml > index ad3466ad16e..3a99073bc33 100644 > --- a/.github/workflows/check-whitespace.yml > +++ b/.github/workflows/check-whitespace.yml > @@ -13,38 +13,57 @@ jobs: > check-whitespace: > runs-on: ubuntu-latest > steps: > - - uses: actions/checkout@v2 > + - uses: actions/checkout@v3 I think we saw changes to upgrade actions/checkout@ in another topic, and it seems that we have missed this one even though we should have upgraded it the same way as other files in the same directory? Shouldn't this hunk be a separate topic on its own, or at least a separate patch on its own in the series? > with: > fetch-depth: 0 > > - name: git log --check > id: check_out > run: | > - log= > + problems=() Is it safe to assume we run Bash here, or can GitHub start using other shells that lack the Bash-ism shell arrays and we should protect against such future? I suspect that we are already depend on <<< Bash-ism, so one more dependency to Bash-ism is not a problem here? I dunno. Thanks.
