Skip to content

Drop the repo-local go-lint job; managed verify lints this repo - #53

Merged
jugonzalez12 merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
jugonzalez/golangci-v2.13.2
Sep 22, 2026
Merged

jugonzalez12 merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
jugonzalez/golangci-v2.13.2

Conversation

@jugonzalez12

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

The managed verify.yaml already runs golangci-lint at the fleet pin, so this job linted the same code a second time with its own pin. That pin, v2.11.4, is built with go1.26 and refuses to load its config for a go1.27 module, which this repo becomes with baton-sdk v0.32.0.

The managed verify.yaml already runs golangci-lint at the fleet pin, so
this job linted the same code a second time with its own pin. That pin,
v2.11.4, is built with go1.26 and refuses to load its config for a
go1.27 module, which this repo becomes with baton-sdk v0.32.0.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5.1 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Comment thread .github/workflows/main.yaml
@github-actions

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Connector PR Review: Drop the repo-local go-lint job; managed verify lints this repo

Blocking Issues: 0 | Suggestions: 2 | Threads Resolved: 0
Criteria: Criteria status: loaded .claude/skills/ci-review.md from trusted base c1b3cbfa4f46.
Review mode: full
View review run

Review Summary

Scanned the full PR diff (workflow-only: 28 deletions across .github/workflows/ci.yaml and .github/workflows/main.yaml, no Go or dependency changes) for security and correctness. The stated premise checks out: the managed ConductorOne/github-workflows/.github/workflows/verify.yaml@v4 called by .github/workflows/verify.yaml runs golangci-lint at v2.13.2 on both pull_request and push: main, so removing the repo-local v2.11.4 jobs leaves no lint coverage gap on either trigger. No blocking issues found; two non-blocking follow-ups below.

Security Issues

None found.

Correctness Issues

None found.

Suggestions

  • .github/workflows/main.yaml:7 — with go-lint removed, this file holds only a go-test job that the managed verify test job already duplicates (and pins go-version: 1.25.x against a go 1.26.0 module); consider removing it, and ci.yaml's go-test, in the same sweep. (medium confidence)
  • Repo settings — if branch protection on main lists go-lint as a required status check, that check will never report again and PRs will block; confirm the required-checks list points at the managed verify / lint job instead. Could not verify from CI (branch-protection API returned 403). (low confidence)
Prompt for AI agents
Verify each finding against the current code and only fix it if needed.

## Suggestions

In `.github/workflows/main.yaml`:
- Around line 6-7: After this PR removes the `go-lint` job, the file contains only a
  `go-test` job that duplicates the managed verify workflow's `test` job, which already
  runs `go test -v -covermode=count -json ./...` on `push: main` using
  `go-version-file: go.mod`. The local job also pins `go-version: 1.25.x` while go.mod
  declares `go 1.26.0`. Consider deleting `.github/workflows/main.yaml` entirely, and
  removing the duplicate `go-test` job from `.github/workflows/ci.yaml`, so Go testing is
  owned solely by the managed verify workflow.

In repository settings (not a file):
- Check whether branch protection on `main` lists `go-lint` as a required status check.
  If it does, that check will never be reported again once this PR merges and PRs will
  block indefinitely. Update the required-checks list to reference the managed
  `verify / lint` job instead.

@github-actions github-actions Bot left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

No blocking issues found.

@jugonzalez12
jugonzalez12 marked this pull request as ready for review September 22, 2026 22:03
@jugonzalez12
jugonzalez12 merged commit 28c8c2c into main Sep 22, 2026
12 checks passed
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.

2 participants