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
📖 Fix command Usage #1814
📖 Fix command Usage #1814
Conversation
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #1814 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 51.27% 55.94% +4.67%
==========================================
Files 80 75 -5
Lines 6797 6733 -64
==========================================
+ Hits 3485 3767 +282
+ Misses 3081 2715 -366
- Partials 231 251 +20 |
Integration tests success for |
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.
Nice update, @lehors!
Left a small nit (open to bikeshed on the exact text).
Integration tests success for |
Integration tests success for |
Integration tests success for |
Stale pull request message |
@justaugustus I made the change you requested. |
Integration tests success for |
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.
Thanks @lehors!
Integration tests success for |
Stale pull request message |
Same comment as for PR#1813: 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? |
Integration tests success for |
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.
Lint failures.
See https://github.com/ossf/scorecard/runs/6351106239?check_suite_focus=true.
This changes the cmd Usage text to accurately represents the supported syntax: Usage: ./scorecard (--repo=<repo> | --local=<folder> | --{npm,pypi,rubygems}=<package_name>) [--checks=check1,...] [--show-details] [flags] ... --repo string repository to check (valid inputs: "owner/repo", "github.com/owner/repo", "https://github.com/owner/repo") ... Signed-off-by: Arnaud J Le Hors <lehors@us.ibm.com>
Integration tests success for |
Integration tests success for |
Fixed. Thanks @justaugustus |
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.
Thanks @lehors!
This changes the cmd Usage text to accurately represents the
supported syntax:
Usage:
./scorecard (--repo=<repo> | --local=<folder> | --{npm,pypi,rubygems}=<package_name> ) [--checks=check1,...]
[--show-details] [flags]
...
--repo string repository to check (valid inputs: "owner/repo", "github.com/owner/repo", "https://github.com/owner/repo")
...
Signed-off-by: Arnaud J Le Hors lehors@us.ibm.com
What kind of change does this PR introduce?
Improvement
What is the current behavior?
What is the new behavior (if this is a feature change)?**
NA
Which issue(s) this PR fixes
NONE
Special notes for your reviewer
I'm not sure whether to categorize this change as a "Documentation" change given that it is in the code, or a "Bug Fix" given that it is merely changing the Usage text of the command... :-)
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, command Usage is more accurate and makes it easier for user to understand what is supported.