On Thu, 2024-01-25 at 22:22 -0800, Otto Kekäläinen wrote: > Yeah, I remember looking into cats some years back as a place to learn > what commands exist. Similarly I also occasionally browse > https://pre-commit.com/hooks.html.
Yeah, there are lots of other tools similar to cats, many of them are linked from the doc/TODO file but there are more I need to add there and probably many more that I don't know about. > The challenge with having all possible checkers is that they create a > lot of noise and managing the false positives end up being a lot of > work. Not suitable for daily use, but I will probably use cats for > "annual checkups" on stuff I maintain. One of the newer features added to cats in 2019 helps there, for some commands it only enables the highest severity level, then if there is no output it moves on to the next level, and so on. You can also disable individual checks or groups of checks as desired. Probably there are some other things we could add to improve the situation. > It would be nice though if the version in Debian was newer :) I probably won't update it until it is suitable for inclusion in a stable release. This means at minimum being relatively safe to run in an untrusted source tree, probably by using debvm to generate a VM containing the relevant tools and running the tools in the VM. > By the way, I submitted some small fixes at > https://github.com/collab-qa/check-all-the-things/pulls. Thanks, I will review them when I get time. -- bye, pabs https://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
