GeezerVison is showing github.com — Add wmllint to CI · Issue #7082 · wesnoth/wesnoth
DescriptionDescribe the desired feature
wmllint errors, genuine or otherwise, have been discussed on and off, most recently in #5799. Commentary in #4381 suggests adding it to the Travis build.
Reacted by Eric Gallager and Slayer95 ActivityPentarctagon commented on Nov 1, 2022 We use Github Actions these days, not Travis :P Wedge009 commented on Nov 1, 2022 I have no idea what the terminology is, I was just following what was written. changed the title [-]Add wmllint to Travis builds[/-] [+]Add wmllint to CI[/+] on Nov 1, 2022sevu commented on Nov 2, 2022 Exists for add-ons:
https://github.com/czyzby/wesnoth-wml-linter
It is a bit different though, in that it runs wmllint on mainline (to get the unit ids etc) and the commit/pr in the add-on repo, and filters the output which belongs to mainline. Pentarctagon commented on Nov 2, 2022
I have no idea what the terminology is, I was just following what was written.
For future reference then - travis and github actions are CI service providers. Travis is what we used before switching to github actions. czyzby commented on Dec 31, 2023 @Pentarctagon What is the expected behavior? Should the jobs fail if wmllint/wmlindent/wmlscope report any issues? Because right now there are quite a lot warnings if you run those. Pentarctagon commented on Dec 31, 2023 Yes, the expectation would be that it should fail. And yeah, it's known there's a bunch of things it warns on. The issue really is that nobody has gone through all those warnings and either fixed the issue or removed the warning for being bad/irrelevant. czyzby commented on Dec 31, 2023 What about spellchecking? I imagine it might increase the number of errors significantly, since you have to register all non-dictionary words with wmllint: general spelling(s). Pentarctagon commented on Dec 31, 2023 What's the question about spellchecking? czyzby commented on Dec 31, 2023 Should it also fail the pipeline or be skipped in the automatic check? Pentarctagon commented on Dec 31, 2023 It should fail the pipeline. czyzby commented on Dec 31, 2023 OK, last question - could you give me a list of all tools that you want and any command line flags that you'd like to include? I'm assuming we'd like to run wmllint, wmlindent and wmlscope in dry-run mode wherever possible. Any extra flags for wmlscope? Pentarctagon commented on Dec 31, 2023 wmlindent is already run. I'm not familiar with wmlscope. cooljeanius commented on Jan 1, 2024
wmlindent is already run. I'm not familiar with wmlscope.
I usually end up skipping that one, just because it prints so much output that I don't know where to start... might be worth asking @Elvish-Hunter about... CelticMinstrel commented on Jan 1, 2024 wmlscope is the tool that generates the macro documentation page, maybe that's relevant somehow.
cooljeanius commented on Jan 1, 2024
wmlscope is the tool that generates the macro documentation page, maybe that's relevant somehow.
Yes, but that's not the mode in which the proposed workflow runs it, though. Pentarctagon commented on Jul 3, 2026
MetadataMetadataDevelopmentNo branches or pull requestsIssue actions
|