Merged
Conversation
c2042f7 to
88b5ed9
Compare
henryiii
approved these changes
Oct 26, 2023
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This PR fixes
ruff check .which started failing with after moving theexcludeto[ruff.lint]ruff.excludeandruff.lint.excludehave slightly different semantics:ruff.exclude: Excludes files from your project, so that ruff skips them for all commands. This also prevents ruff from loading configuration files in excluded directories.ruff.lint.exclude: Excludes files from linting only. However, ruff loads the files (and related configurations).You want
ruff.lint.excludeto avoid the intentionally malformed configuration.Question: Could we improve our documentation to make this distinction more clear?
Test Plan
ruff check .no longer fails because of the malformed configuration.