📖 Remove erroneous ref to CSV output

[lehors]

Signed-off-by: Arnaud J Le Hors lehors@us.ibm.com

What kind of change does this PR introduce?

docs update

• [ x] PR title follows the guidelines defined in our pull request documentation

What is the current behavior?

README claims that CSV output format is supported.

What is the new behavior (if this is a feature change)?**

README only lists default and json as output formats.

• Tests for the changes have been added (for bug fixes/features)

NA.

Which issue(s) this PR fixes

NONE

Special notes for your reviewer

I actually happen to regret the drop of CSV output support but at least the documentation should be consistent with the code.

Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?

For user-facing changes, please add a concise, human-readable release note to
the release-note

Yes, the README no longer misleads the user.

Update README to reflect actual list of supported output formats.

[naveensrinivasan]

Thanks

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Merging #1813 (f356a94) into main (5758364) will not change coverage.
The diff coverage is n/a.

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main    #1813   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   51.27%   51.27%           
=======================================
  Files          80       80           
  Lines        6797     6797           
=======================================
  Hits         3485     3485           
  Misses       3081     3081           
  Partials      231      231           

[github-actions]

Integration tests success for
[3c8be1e]
(https://github.com/ossf/scorecard/actions/runs/2089991687)

[justaugustus]

Tiny nits on the language.
In addition to mentioning the format options, we should specify what default actually means (outputting as a table).

Could you mention this in the flags as well?

[github-actions]

Integration tests success for
[518df3e]
(https://github.com/ossf/scorecard/actions/runs/2090617226)

[github-actions]

Integration tests success for
[059d9c2]
(https://github.com/ossf/scorecard/actions/runs/2090726279)

[github-actions]

Integration tests success for
[d6f4afd]
(https://github.com/ossf/scorecard/actions/runs/2115649430)

[github-actions]

Stale pull request message

[lehors]

Tiny nits on the language. In addition to mentioning the format options, we should specify what default actually means (outputting as a table).

Could you mention this in the flags as well?

@justaugustus Done. Thanks.

[github-actions]

Integration tests success for
[2c74788]
(https://github.com/ossf/scorecard/actions/runs/2187764663)

[github-actions]

Integration tests success for
[aad643d]
(https://github.com/ossf/scorecard/actions/runs/2241732258)

[github-actions]

Stale pull request message

[lehors]

I realize this isn't the most exciting PR maintainers might dream of but I would advise them to be a bit more diligent in merging PRs from the community. It is not a very pleasant experience to have to keep rebasing your PRs because it is being left unattended by the maintainers. @justaugustus could you please help?
Thanks.

[justaugustus]

I realize this isn't the most exciting PR maintainers might dream of but I would advise them to be a bit more diligent in merging PRs from the community. It is not a very pleasant experience to have to keep rebasing your PRs because it is being left unattended by the maintainers.

Thanks for the PR, @lehors!
As a note, several of the maintainers are preparing for conferences and other events, hence the delayed reviews.

[github-actions]

Integration tests success for
[f356a94]
(https://github.com/ossf/scorecard/actions/runs/2293933097)