New rake check - compare root url: to filename (without suffix)#1069
Open
jasnow wants to merge 1 commit into
Open
New rake check - compare root url: to filename (without suffix)#1069jasnow wants to merge 1 commit into
jasnow wants to merge 1 commit into
Conversation
Contributor
Author
|
Hint: If you want to see all the failed check, change the start date to 2000 and you will see all of them. |
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
1 participant
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
Based on @simi's feedback during the past week or two, I tried to create a new "rake" lint check (rule) for root
url:== basename(filenname).First, since this is a new rule and the large number of failed checks on existing advisories, I decided to pick a start date to start applying it. I found that advisories with
date:> "2026-05-09" all passed. I know this is a compromise but I hope the team agree that the new check is worth the compromise.Second, I skipped the OSVDB advisories because they are very old and that database was removed from the web and internet archive.