Skip to content

chore: some .toml files had divergent description, edition, or version fields - #3969

Open
hippietrail wants to merge 3 commits into
Automattic:masterfrom
hippietrail:standardize-tomls
Open

chore: some .toml files had divergent description, edition, or version fields#3969
hippietrail wants to merge 3 commits into
Automattic:masterfrom
hippietrail:standardize-tomls

Conversation

@hippietrail

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Issues

N/A

Description

When setting up my new posslq package I wanted to make sure I set up the fields of its .toml file matching the other .tomls in the repo.

I wrote a little tool to compare them. (Let me know if you want me to share it or add it to Harper's build tests.)

The tool found five .toml files with fields that didn't match most others in the repo.

It only checks for values that don't fit the pattern, it doesn't check for missing keys or extra keys in comparison to the overall average. Let me know if I should add this.

Let me know if any of these values were specifically not matching the others on purpose for some reason.

How Has This Been Tested?

cargo test

AI Disclosure

  • I am a human and didn't use any AI.
  • I used LLM features of my editor, but not an agent.
  • I consulted one or more coding AIs, but didn't use an agent.
  • I used an AI agent interactively.
  • I am an agent or I got an agent to do the work autonomously.

Well I did use AI help to make the tool that I found these apparent anomalies with, but I changed the toml files myself.

Checklist

  • I have performed a self-review of my own code
  • I have added tests to cover my changes
  • I have considered splitting this into smaller pull requests.

…`version` fields

When setting up my new `posslq` package I wanted to make sure I set up the fields of its `.toml` file matching the other `.toml`s in the repo.

I wrote a little tool to compare them. (Let me know if you want me to share it or add it to Harper's build tests.)

The tool found five `.toml` files with fields that didn't match most others in the repo.

It only checks for values that don't fit the pattern, it doesn't check for missing keys or extra keys in comparison to the overall average. Let me know if I should add this.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant