Skip to content

Re-check Vale and fix errors #616

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

Open
wants to merge 2 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from
Open

Re-check Vale and fix errors #616

wants to merge 2 commits into from

Conversation

erinecon
Copy link
Contributor

@erinecon erinecon commented Aug 6, 2025

Applicable ticket: ISD-3949

Overview

Run Vale checks locally and fix errors.

Rationale

There's a bug in operator-workflows that points to an older version of the Canonical Vale style checks. Therefore some of the checks will be missed in the GitHub CI.

I skipped the docs under jobmanager/client since those are auto-generated docs.

Juju Events Changes

None

Module Changes

None

Library Changes

None

Checklist

  • The charm style guide was applied.
  • The contributing guide was applied.
  • The changes are compliant with ISD054 - Managing Charm Complexity
  • The documentation for charmhub is updated.
  • The PR is tagged with appropriate label (urgent, trivial, complex).
  • The changelog is updated with changes that affects the users of the charm.
  • The application version number is updated in github-runner-manager/pyproject.toml.

Either discourse-gatekeeper will update the documentation on Charmhub or I'll do it after the approval of this PR.

Since these are trivial changes, I don't think the changelog needs to be updated.

Since these are doc-only changes, I don't think I need to update the version number in github-runner-manager/pyproject.toml

@erinecon erinecon added the documentation Improvements or additions to documentation label Aug 6, 2025
Copy link
Contributor

github-actions bot commented Aug 6, 2025

Test results for commit b1b9ec6

Test coverage for b1b9ec6

Wrote XML report to coverage/coverage.xml

Static code analysis report

Run started:2025-08-06 13:58:50.099882

Test results:
  No issues identified.

Code scanned:
  Total lines of code: 2026
  Total lines skipped (#nosec): 2
  Total potential issues skipped due to specifically being disabled (e.g., #nosec BXXX): 1

Run metrics:
  Total issues (by severity):
  	Undefined: 0
  	Low: 0
  	Medium: 0
  	High: 0
  Total issues (by confidence):
  	Undefined: 0
  	Low: 0
  	Medium: 0
  	High: 0
Files skipped (0):

Copy link
Member

@yanksyoon yanksyoon left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks for the changes, they look good to me!

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
documentation Improvements or additions to documentation
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants