ci: spelling: update to v0.0.18 (#10035)
Co-authored-by: Josh Soref <jsoref@users.noreply.github.com>
<!-- Enter a brief description/summary of your PR here. What does it fix/what does it change/how was it tested (even manually, if necessary)? -->
## Summary of the Pull Request
Upgrade check-spelling to [v0.0.18](https://github.com/check-spelling/check-spelling/releases/tag/v0.0.18)
<!-- Other than the issue solved, is this relevant to any other issues/existing PRs? -->
## References
<!-- Please review the items on the PR checklist before submitting-->
## PR Checklist
* [ ] Closes #xxx
* [x] CLA signed. If not, go over [here](https://cla.opensource.microsoft.com/microsoft/Terminal) and sign the CLA
* [ ] Tests added/passed
* [ ] Documentation updated. If checked, please file a pull request on [our docs repo](https://github.com/MicrosoftDocs/terminal) and link it here: #xxx
* [ ] Schema updated.
* [ ] I've discussed this with core contributors already. If not checked, I'm ready to accept this work might be rejected in favor of a different grand plan. Issue number where discussion took place: #xxx
<!-- Provide a more detailed description of the PR, other things fixed or any additional comments/features here -->
## Detailed Description of the Pull Request / Additional comments
I've replaced the `dictionary` directory with `allow` and `reject`. When terminal got check-spelling, I didn't have a way to do `allow`/`reject` (but they were added a while ago). With this release, the bot will complain about items that are in user managed files that wouldn't be valid, this is mostly `-`s in dictionary files, but it also includes numbers `0`..`9` and `_`. If a specific token needs to be accepted but not its sub-elements, the item should be added to `patterns.txt` instead (`D2DERR_SHADER_COMPILE_FAILED` is an example).
With this version, check-spelling defaults to only considering tokens with at least 3 letters. It's possible to tune it back to 2 (or even 1), but in testing, the 2 character tokens have ended up not being worthwhile. (This can be [adjusted](https://github.com/check-spelling/check-spelling/wiki/Configuration#shortest_word) if it turns out that people manage to misspell two character tokens often enough to justify checking them.)
<!-- Describe how you validated the behavior. Add automated tests wherever possible, but list manual validation steps taken as well -->
## Validation Steps Performed
I ran a number of passes of the spell checker in https://github.com/check-spelling/terminal/actions (note: I tend to delete this repository, so this link may be dead at some point, and action run logs expire).
2021-05-14 15:28:37 +02:00
<!-- markdownlint - disable MD033 MD041 -->
2020-04-01 21:15:42 +02:00
< details >
< summary >
:pencil2: Contributor please read this
< / summary >
2020-05-28 15:01:52 +02:00
By default the command suggestion will generate a file named based on your commit. That's generally ok as long as you add the file to your commit. Someone can reorganize it later.
:warning: The command is written for posix shells. You can copy the contents of each `perl` command excluding the outer `'` marks and dropping any `'"` /`"'` quotation mark pairs into a file and then run `perl file.pl` from the root of the repository to run the code. Alternatively, you can manually insert the items...
If the listed items are:
ci: spelling: update to v0.0.18 (#10035)
Co-authored-by: Josh Soref <jsoref@users.noreply.github.com>
<!-- Enter a brief description/summary of your PR here. What does it fix/what does it change/how was it tested (even manually, if necessary)? -->
## Summary of the Pull Request
Upgrade check-spelling to [v0.0.18](https://github.com/check-spelling/check-spelling/releases/tag/v0.0.18)
<!-- Other than the issue solved, is this relevant to any other issues/existing PRs? -->
## References
<!-- Please review the items on the PR checklist before submitting-->
## PR Checklist
* [ ] Closes #xxx
* [x] CLA signed. If not, go over [here](https://cla.opensource.microsoft.com/microsoft/Terminal) and sign the CLA
* [ ] Tests added/passed
* [ ] Documentation updated. If checked, please file a pull request on [our docs repo](https://github.com/MicrosoftDocs/terminal) and link it here: #xxx
* [ ] Schema updated.
* [ ] I've discussed this with core contributors already. If not checked, I'm ready to accept this work might be rejected in favor of a different grand plan. Issue number where discussion took place: #xxx
<!-- Provide a more detailed description of the PR, other things fixed or any additional comments/features here -->
## Detailed Description of the Pull Request / Additional comments
I've replaced the `dictionary` directory with `allow` and `reject`. When terminal got check-spelling, I didn't have a way to do `allow`/`reject` (but they were added a while ago). With this release, the bot will complain about items that are in user managed files that wouldn't be valid, this is mostly `-`s in dictionary files, but it also includes numbers `0`..`9` and `_`. If a specific token needs to be accepted but not its sub-elements, the item should be added to `patterns.txt` instead (`D2DERR_SHADER_COMPILE_FAILED` is an example).
With this version, check-spelling defaults to only considering tokens with at least 3 letters. It's possible to tune it back to 2 (or even 1), but in testing, the 2 character tokens have ended up not being worthwhile. (This can be [adjusted](https://github.com/check-spelling/check-spelling/wiki/Configuration#shortest_word) if it turns out that people manage to misspell two character tokens often enough to justify checking them.)
<!-- Describe how you validated the behavior. Add automated tests wherever possible, but list manual validation steps taken as well -->
## Validation Steps Performed
I ran a number of passes of the spell checker in https://github.com/check-spelling/terminal/actions (note: I tend to delete this repository, so this link may be dead at some point, and action run logs expire).
2021-05-14 15:28:37 +02:00
2020-05-28 15:01:52 +02:00
* ... **misspelled** , then please *correct* them instead of using the command.
ci: spelling: update to v0.0.18 (#10035)
Co-authored-by: Josh Soref <jsoref@users.noreply.github.com>
<!-- Enter a brief description/summary of your PR here. What does it fix/what does it change/how was it tested (even manually, if necessary)? -->
## Summary of the Pull Request
Upgrade check-spelling to [v0.0.18](https://github.com/check-spelling/check-spelling/releases/tag/v0.0.18)
<!-- Other than the issue solved, is this relevant to any other issues/existing PRs? -->
## References
<!-- Please review the items on the PR checklist before submitting-->
## PR Checklist
* [ ] Closes #xxx
* [x] CLA signed. If not, go over [here](https://cla.opensource.microsoft.com/microsoft/Terminal) and sign the CLA
* [ ] Tests added/passed
* [ ] Documentation updated. If checked, please file a pull request on [our docs repo](https://github.com/MicrosoftDocs/terminal) and link it here: #xxx
* [ ] Schema updated.
* [ ] I've discussed this with core contributors already. If not checked, I'm ready to accept this work might be rejected in favor of a different grand plan. Issue number where discussion took place: #xxx
<!-- Provide a more detailed description of the PR, other things fixed or any additional comments/features here -->
## Detailed Description of the Pull Request / Additional comments
I've replaced the `dictionary` directory with `allow` and `reject`. When terminal got check-spelling, I didn't have a way to do `allow`/`reject` (but they were added a while ago). With this release, the bot will complain about items that are in user managed files that wouldn't be valid, this is mostly `-`s in dictionary files, but it also includes numbers `0`..`9` and `_`. If a specific token needs to be accepted but not its sub-elements, the item should be added to `patterns.txt` instead (`D2DERR_SHADER_COMPILE_FAILED` is an example).
With this version, check-spelling defaults to only considering tokens with at least 3 letters. It's possible to tune it back to 2 (or even 1), but in testing, the 2 character tokens have ended up not being worthwhile. (This can be [adjusted](https://github.com/check-spelling/check-spelling/wiki/Configuration#shortest_word) if it turns out that people manage to misspell two character tokens often enough to justify checking them.)
<!-- Describe how you validated the behavior. Add automated tests wherever possible, but list manual validation steps taken as well -->
## Validation Steps Performed
I ran a number of passes of the spell checker in https://github.com/check-spelling/terminal/actions (note: I tend to delete this repository, so this link may be dead at some point, and action run logs expire).
2021-05-14 15:28:37 +02:00
* ... *names* , please add them to `.github/actions/spelling/allow/names.txt` .
* ... APIs, you can add them to a file in `.github/actions/spelling/allow/` .
ci: update to Spell check to 0.0.17a (#9014)
### Plurals and paste tenses
In the past, plurals `foo`+`s` and past tenses `foo`+`ed` were
automatically tolerated. This turned out to be a bad design choice on my
part.
The basic example is that `potatos` would sometimes be treated as a
mistake and sometimes not (depending on the presence of `potato`).
You can see in this PR, that this logic resulted in `Applys` being
accepted as a word along with `AppContainered` -- there's nothing
intrinsically wrong w/ the latter, but unfortunately in order to screen
out the former, my shortcut just couldn't stick around. This means that
the `dictionary`/`expect` files will grow perhaps by a tiny bit, but as
you can see, not really by much.
This is also why `thereses` (a user) was accepted as a word in the past
(therese is in the base dictionary, so `therese` + `s` was acceptable).
### Pull requests
When GitHub initially introduced GitHub Actions, the event for
`pull_request` was created without enough permission for a tool like
this to work properly. I worked around that by using the `schedule`
event. In 2020, they introduced a replacement event
`pull_request_target` which has enough permission. This means that I can
stop relying on the `schedule` event.
### Miscellaneous
* I've folded together some `expect/` files since now is as good a time
as any.
* I've included a hint about `excludes.txt` (I added a similar one for
our primary repo recently, and it came up this week in
`microsoft/terminal` -- @zadjii-msft)
* I've standardized on a default of `.github/actions/spelling` to make
the out of the box experience easier for new adopters, so I'm applying
that change here -- if you're attached to the old directory name,
specifying it is still supported. -- note the directory rename may
cause a merge conflict for people with open PRs and changes to the
contents, this shouldn't be a big problem.
2021-02-03 20:17:38 +01:00
* ... just things you're using, please add them to an appropriate file in `.github/actions/spelling/expect/` .
* ... tokens you only need in one place and shouldn't *generally be used* , you can add an item in an appropriate file in `.github/actions/spelling/patterns/` .
2020-04-01 21:15:42 +02:00
See the `README.md` in each directory for more information.
2020-05-28 15:01:52 +02:00
ci: update to Spell check to 0.0.17a (#9014)
### Plurals and paste tenses
In the past, plurals `foo`+`s` and past tenses `foo`+`ed` were
automatically tolerated. This turned out to be a bad design choice on my
part.
The basic example is that `potatos` would sometimes be treated as a
mistake and sometimes not (depending on the presence of `potato`).
You can see in this PR, that this logic resulted in `Applys` being
accepted as a word along with `AppContainered` -- there's nothing
intrinsically wrong w/ the latter, but unfortunately in order to screen
out the former, my shortcut just couldn't stick around. This means that
the `dictionary`/`expect` files will grow perhaps by a tiny bit, but as
you can see, not really by much.
This is also why `thereses` (a user) was accepted as a word in the past
(therese is in the base dictionary, so `therese` + `s` was acceptable).
### Pull requests
When GitHub initially introduced GitHub Actions, the event for
`pull_request` was created without enough permission for a tool like
this to work properly. I worked around that by using the `schedule`
event. In 2020, they introduced a replacement event
`pull_request_target` which has enough permission. This means that I can
stop relying on the `schedule` event.
### Miscellaneous
* I've folded together some `expect/` files since now is as good a time
as any.
* I've included a hint about `excludes.txt` (I added a similar one for
our primary repo recently, and it came up this week in
`microsoft/terminal` -- @zadjii-msft)
* I've standardized on a default of `.github/actions/spelling` to make
the out of the box experience easier for new adopters, so I'm applying
that change here -- if you're attached to the old directory name,
specifying it is still supported. -- note the directory rename may
cause a merge conflict for people with open PRs and changes to the
contents, this shouldn't be a big problem.
2021-02-03 20:17:38 +01:00
:microscope: You can test your commits **without** *appending* to a PR by creating a new branch with that extra change and pushing it to your fork. The [check-spelling ](https://github.com/marketplace/actions/check-spelling ) action will run in response to your **push** -- it doesn't require an open pull request. By using such a branch, you can limit the number of typos your peers see you make. :wink:
2020-05-28 15:01:52 +02:00
ci: spelling: update to v0.0.18 (#10035)
Co-authored-by: Josh Soref <jsoref@users.noreply.github.com>
<!-- Enter a brief description/summary of your PR here. What does it fix/what does it change/how was it tested (even manually, if necessary)? -->
## Summary of the Pull Request
Upgrade check-spelling to [v0.0.18](https://github.com/check-spelling/check-spelling/releases/tag/v0.0.18)
<!-- Other than the issue solved, is this relevant to any other issues/existing PRs? -->
## References
<!-- Please review the items on the PR checklist before submitting-->
## PR Checklist
* [ ] Closes #xxx
* [x] CLA signed. If not, go over [here](https://cla.opensource.microsoft.com/microsoft/Terminal) and sign the CLA
* [ ] Tests added/passed
* [ ] Documentation updated. If checked, please file a pull request on [our docs repo](https://github.com/MicrosoftDocs/terminal) and link it here: #xxx
* [ ] Schema updated.
* [ ] I've discussed this with core contributors already. If not checked, I'm ready to accept this work might be rejected in favor of a different grand plan. Issue number where discussion took place: #xxx
<!-- Provide a more detailed description of the PR, other things fixed or any additional comments/features here -->
## Detailed Description of the Pull Request / Additional comments
I've replaced the `dictionary` directory with `allow` and `reject`. When terminal got check-spelling, I didn't have a way to do `allow`/`reject` (but they were added a while ago). With this release, the bot will complain about items that are in user managed files that wouldn't be valid, this is mostly `-`s in dictionary files, but it also includes numbers `0`..`9` and `_`. If a specific token needs to be accepted but not its sub-elements, the item should be added to `patterns.txt` instead (`D2DERR_SHADER_COMPILE_FAILED` is an example).
With this version, check-spelling defaults to only considering tokens with at least 3 letters. It's possible to tune it back to 2 (or even 1), but in testing, the 2 character tokens have ended up not being worthwhile. (This can be [adjusted](https://github.com/check-spelling/check-spelling/wiki/Configuration#shortest_word) if it turns out that people manage to misspell two character tokens often enough to justify checking them.)
<!-- Describe how you validated the behavior. Add automated tests wherever possible, but list manual validation steps taken as well -->
## Validation Steps Performed
I ran a number of passes of the spell checker in https://github.com/check-spelling/terminal/actions (note: I tend to delete this repository, so this link may be dead at some point, and action run logs expire).
2021-05-14 15:28:37 +02:00
< details > < summary > :clamp: If you see a bunch of garbage< / summary >
If it relates to a ...
< details > < summary > well-formed pattern< / summary >
See if there's a [pattern ](https://github.com/check-spelling/check-spelling/wiki/Configuration-Examples:-patterns ) that would match it.
If not, try writing one and adding it to a `patterns/{file}.txt` .
Patterns are Perl 5 Regular Expressions - you can [test](
https://www.regexplanet.com/advanced/perl/) yours before committing to verify it will match your lines.
Note that patterns can't match multiline strings.
< / details >
< details > < summary > binary-ish string< / summary >
Please add a file path to the `excludes.txt` file instead of just accepting the garbage.
ci: update to Spell check to 0.0.17a (#9014)
### Plurals and paste tenses
In the past, plurals `foo`+`s` and past tenses `foo`+`ed` were
automatically tolerated. This turned out to be a bad design choice on my
part.
The basic example is that `potatos` would sometimes be treated as a
mistake and sometimes not (depending on the presence of `potato`).
You can see in this PR, that this logic resulted in `Applys` being
accepted as a word along with `AppContainered` -- there's nothing
intrinsically wrong w/ the latter, but unfortunately in order to screen
out the former, my shortcut just couldn't stick around. This means that
the `dictionary`/`expect` files will grow perhaps by a tiny bit, but as
you can see, not really by much.
This is also why `thereses` (a user) was accepted as a word in the past
(therese is in the base dictionary, so `therese` + `s` was acceptable).
### Pull requests
When GitHub initially introduced GitHub Actions, the event for
`pull_request` was created without enough permission for a tool like
this to work properly. I worked around that by using the `schedule`
event. In 2020, they introduced a replacement event
`pull_request_target` which has enough permission. This means that I can
stop relying on the `schedule` event.
### Miscellaneous
* I've folded together some `expect/` files since now is as good a time
as any.
* I've included a hint about `excludes.txt` (I added a similar one for
our primary repo recently, and it came up this week in
`microsoft/terminal` -- @zadjii-msft)
* I've standardized on a default of `.github/actions/spelling` to make
the out of the box experience easier for new adopters, so I'm applying
that change here -- if you're attached to the old directory name,
specifying it is still supported. -- note the directory rename may
cause a merge conflict for people with open PRs and changes to the
contents, this shouldn't be a big problem.
2021-02-03 20:17:38 +01:00
File paths are Perl 5 Regular Expressions - you can [test](
https://www.regexplanet.com/advanced/perl/) yours before committing to verify it will match your files.
2020-04-01 21:15:42 +02:00
ci: spelling: update to v0.0.18 (#10035)
Co-authored-by: Josh Soref <jsoref@users.noreply.github.com>
<!-- Enter a brief description/summary of your PR here. What does it fix/what does it change/how was it tested (even manually, if necessary)? -->
## Summary of the Pull Request
Upgrade check-spelling to [v0.0.18](https://github.com/check-spelling/check-spelling/releases/tag/v0.0.18)
<!-- Other than the issue solved, is this relevant to any other issues/existing PRs? -->
## References
<!-- Please review the items on the PR checklist before submitting-->
## PR Checklist
* [ ] Closes #xxx
* [x] CLA signed. If not, go over [here](https://cla.opensource.microsoft.com/microsoft/Terminal) and sign the CLA
* [ ] Tests added/passed
* [ ] Documentation updated. If checked, please file a pull request on [our docs repo](https://github.com/MicrosoftDocs/terminal) and link it here: #xxx
* [ ] Schema updated.
* [ ] I've discussed this with core contributors already. If not checked, I'm ready to accept this work might be rejected in favor of a different grand plan. Issue number where discussion took place: #xxx
<!-- Provide a more detailed description of the PR, other things fixed or any additional comments/features here -->
## Detailed Description of the Pull Request / Additional comments
I've replaced the `dictionary` directory with `allow` and `reject`. When terminal got check-spelling, I didn't have a way to do `allow`/`reject` (but they were added a while ago). With this release, the bot will complain about items that are in user managed files that wouldn't be valid, this is mostly `-`s in dictionary files, but it also includes numbers `0`..`9` and `_`. If a specific token needs to be accepted but not its sub-elements, the item should be added to `patterns.txt` instead (`D2DERR_SHADER_COMPILE_FAILED` is an example).
With this version, check-spelling defaults to only considering tokens with at least 3 letters. It's possible to tune it back to 2 (or even 1), but in testing, the 2 character tokens have ended up not being worthwhile. (This can be [adjusted](https://github.com/check-spelling/check-spelling/wiki/Configuration#shortest_word) if it turns out that people manage to misspell two character tokens often enough to justify checking them.)
<!-- Describe how you validated the behavior. Add automated tests wherever possible, but list manual validation steps taken as well -->
## Validation Steps Performed
I ran a number of passes of the spell checker in https://github.com/check-spelling/terminal/actions (note: I tend to delete this repository, so this link may be dead at some point, and action run logs expire).
2021-05-14 15:28:37 +02:00
`^` refers to the file's path from the root of the repository, so `^README\.md$` would exclude [README.md](
../tree/HEAD/README.md) (on whichever branch you're using).
< / details >
< / details >
ci: update to Spell check to 0.0.17a (#9014)
### Plurals and paste tenses
In the past, plurals `foo`+`s` and past tenses `foo`+`ed` were
automatically tolerated. This turned out to be a bad design choice on my
part.
The basic example is that `potatos` would sometimes be treated as a
mistake and sometimes not (depending on the presence of `potato`).
You can see in this PR, that this logic resulted in `Applys` being
accepted as a word along with `AppContainered` -- there's nothing
intrinsically wrong w/ the latter, but unfortunately in order to screen
out the former, my shortcut just couldn't stick around. This means that
the `dictionary`/`expect` files will grow perhaps by a tiny bit, but as
you can see, not really by much.
This is also why `thereses` (a user) was accepted as a word in the past
(therese is in the base dictionary, so `therese` + `s` was acceptable).
### Pull requests
When GitHub initially introduced GitHub Actions, the event for
`pull_request` was created without enough permission for a tool like
this to work properly. I worked around that by using the `schedule`
event. In 2020, they introduced a replacement event
`pull_request_target` which has enough permission. This means that I can
stop relying on the `schedule` event.
### Miscellaneous
* I've folded together some `expect/` files since now is as good a time
as any.
* I've included a hint about `excludes.txt` (I added a similar one for
our primary repo recently, and it came up this week in
`microsoft/terminal` -- @zadjii-msft)
* I've standardized on a default of `.github/actions/spelling` to make
the out of the box experience easier for new adopters, so I'm applying
that change here -- if you're attached to the old directory name,
specifying it is still supported. -- note the directory rename may
cause a merge conflict for people with open PRs and changes to the
contents, this shouldn't be a big problem.
2021-02-03 20:17:38 +01:00
< / details >
