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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
feat: scope verification reports to a report_version via valid_from #843
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
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
feat: scope verification reports to a report_version via valid_from #843
Changes from all commits
3046110c0ba1911ca8eef8dfff5f9c26357afe61f5c5b79d2File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Jump to
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There are no files selected for viewing
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.
Good catch, and you're right that it's inconsistent with the documented
valid_from/valid_untilsemantics (tool_req__docs_req_attr_validity_correctness: "from" inclusive, "until" exclusive).This is intentional scope for this PR, though:
report_versionhere answers "everything relevant as of release X" (a snapshot of what should exist by then), not "everything still valid in release X" (which would additionally need thevalid_untilexclusion you describe). We deliberately kept it to the simplervalid_from-only check for the initial version of this feature - happy to open a follow-up to addreport_version < valid_untilsupport (withcomp_reqinheriting the full interval viaderived_from, as you suggest) once there's a concrete need for it, rather than speculatively building it now.Added focused unit tests for the current behavior (including the
comp_req/derived_frominheritance path and malformed-value handling) in b71c770.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.
In my opinion this can never happen, or am I thinking wrong?
I do like defensive programming, but this seems a bit weird.
If anything this defence may should be in the parser.
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.
Single variable indirections are useless imo.
Makes it harder to read.
You are only using htem on 2 places, so this makes no sense to put into a variable that is also the same lenght...
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.