Updates check-spelling to 0.0.19
https://github.com/check-spelling/check-spelling/security/advisories/GHSA-g86g-chm8-7r2p
I'm pinning `actions/checkout` to @v2 instead of micromanaging the
version. We have reasonable faith that GitHub will do a good job of
maintaining their version branch.
I'll probably introduce a version branch for check-spelling in the near
future as well. The job name change is for future bits -- I originally
copied the name from a template and didn't understand its significance
-- eventually it'll actually be used by the workflow. And if one uses
`act`, having distinct / well named jobs is actually useful.
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).
### 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.
Let's not just disable the `on` rules for the linter, let's just remove
it entirely. The way it's set up now, you'll get an email every time you
push to a PR, because GitHub fails to find any time to run the linter.
* [x] I work here
* [x] Follow-up to #8152
All our JSON files are _actually_ JSONC files - json with comments.
A well-behaved application that accepts JSON should accept and ignore
comments. However, `jsonlint` is not a well behaved application in this
regard.
So, to prevent the linter from complaining about our JSON comments, we
need to disable it entirely. THAT'S RIGHT, there's not a setting to
allow JSONC.
See #8076 as an example of this working.
This will also unblock #7462.
Updates the GH Action and makes a small update to the README to test
changes.
A missing install step for Windows Terminal using Scoop has been added.
The versioning of Super-Linter was also switched to v3 to allow
auto-updates within the v3 series. This can be version-pinned again if a
breaking change comes later. The current updates fix some bugs and bump
the linters utilized.
## Validation Steps Performed
Validation will be shown in the build steps.
Closes#7934
Terminal ships with this dependency embedded, and it is not required that you install it separately. Since the link is broken, let's just remove it entirely.
* [x] fixes#7889
* [x] related to https://github.com/microsoft/terminal/issues/7917#issuecomment-707955335
* [x] I work here
* [x] is a docs update
Additionally, update the markdown linter rules in the wake of #7637, because apparently that was never actually applied to any files, so now the onus is on the first person to touch any of our markdown files.
For whatever reason, the super linter seems to think that any file it doesn't recognize is an EDITORCONFIG file. That means all our `cpp`, `hpp`, `h`, `resw`, `xaml`, etc files are going to get linted with different rules than the clang-format ones we already use.
This PR disables the EDITORCONFIG linter, and has a minimal change to a cpp file to ensure that it's no longer linted by the action.
See also:
* #7637 added this
* #7799 is blocked by this
* #7924 is blocked by this
This uses the templates from
https://github.com/github/super-linter/tree/master/TEMPLATES currently.
A future PR can add the necessary templates to the Windows Terminal
repository and update the source of Templates following the README.
Additionally we can add flags to explicitly choose the linters
applicable to this code base but is not necessary.
Per the README, this does not enforce any linting rules but rather
outputs the suggestions in the build step, which are to be read by the
PR submitter and Windows Terminal team to determine if they want to use
the linting rule. C++ is currently not supported (Powershell, Json,
Yaml, and Markdown will be the only things the linter checks for
currently) but we could add our own custom support if desired in
separate PR.
## Validation Steps Performed
It successfully runs. Currently only shows the yaml file itself being
linted in this PR as a test case. It will apply to new PRs once this is
merged. We can lint existing code base but would require a separate PR
and examining the code output (also requires updating the yaml file
temporarily).
Closes#7513
<!-- 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
Updates the check spelling action to [0.0.16-a](https://github.com/check-spelling/check-spelling/releases/tag/0.0.16-alpha)
* update advice -- [sample](57fc13f6c6 (commitcomment-39489723)) -- I really do encourage others to adjust it as desired
* rename `expect` (there are consumers who were not a fan of the `whitelist` nomenclature)
* prune stale items
* some `patterns` improvements to reduce the number of items in `expect`
<!-- Other than the issue solved, is this relevant to any other issues/existing PRs? -->
⚠️ Anyone with an inflight addition of a new file to the `whitelist` directory will be moderately unhappy as the action would only use items from there if it didn't find `expect` (and this PR includes the rename).
## 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
* [ ] Requires documentation to be 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
Runs should be ~30s faster.
I was hoping to be able to offer the ability to talk to the bot, but sadly that feature is still not quite ready -- and I suspect that I may want to let projects opt in/out of that feature.
<!-- Describe how you validated the behavior. Add automated tests wherever possible, but list manual validation steps taken as well -->
## Validation Steps Performed
* I added a commit with misspellings: 57fc13f6c6❌ and ran the command it suggested (in bash).
* The commit [itself passes its own testing](78df00dcf6) ✔️
The commands were never `cmd`/`psh` friendly. This iteration is designed to make it easier for a bot to parse and eventually do the work in response to a GitHub request, sadly that feature is behind schedule.
* Cleaning up the whitelist a bit.
* The magic to exclude repeated characters worked 👍
* Every successful run on master now logs its suggested cleanup, e.g. for 5740e197c2 has https://github.com/microsoft/terminal/runs/596271627#step:4:37
* ⚠️ This check-spelling 0.0.15a+ tolerates Windows line endings in the `whitelist.txt` file (another project I touched had some `.gitconfig` magic which required supporting them).
This means that if someone edits the file w/ something that likes Windows line endings, the file will successfully convert (instead of it being ignored and check-spelling complaining about everything). Most likely anyone else who then edits the file will use something that will maintain the line endings.
This repository tends to use `/`s in branch names.
Unfortunately, `branch: "*"` at present only matches a single
level, which means it would match a branch named `foo` but not `bar/foo`.
Given that I don't think this repository is actively using tags,
and given that the general cost for the spell checker isn't particularly
high, it's better to remove the filtering so that all branches get
checked.
Worst case, a branch that is also tagged and has spelling errors
will get two comments complaining about those spelling errors.
This commit introduces a github action to check our spelling and fixes
the following misspelled words so that we come up green.
It also renames TfEditSes to TfEditSession, because Ses is not a word.
currently, excerpt, fallthrough, identified, occurred, propagate,
provided, rendered, resetting, separate, succeeded, successfully,
terminal, transferred, adheres, breaks, combining, preceded,
architecture, populated, previous, setter, visible, window, within,
appxmanifest, hyphen, control, offset, powerpoint, suppress, parsing,
prioritized, aforementioned, check in, build, filling, indices, layout,
mapping, trying, scroll, terabyte, vetoes, viewport, whose
