Skip to content

Conversation

@colindean
Copy link
Contributor

@colindean colindean commented Dec 19, 2022

As nudged here, but this won't be fully effective until pre-commit/identify#353 is merged.

I think this is safe to merge before 353 because so few people use *.make... I think I've seen it maybe a few times in 20 years. Also, this hook is so new to checkmake that probably not that many people are using it yet.

Checklist

Not all of these might apply to your change but the more you are able to check
the easier it will be to get your contribution merged.

  • CI passes
  • Description of proposed change
  • Documentation (README, docs/, man pages) is updated
  • Existing issue is referenced if there is one
  • Unit tests for the proposed change

As nudged [here][1], but this won't be fully effective until pre-commit/identify#353 is merged.

I think this is safe because so few people use `*.make`... I think I've seen it maybe a few times in 20 years.

[1]: pre-commit/pre-commit.com#756 (comment)
@colindean
Copy link
Contributor Author

All of the upstream stuff is merged, so this can go in, @mrtazz

@colindean
Copy link
Contributor Author

@mrtazz this is safe to merge now

@colindean
Copy link
Contributor Author

@mrtazz Any chance for a merge?

@mrtazz
Copy link
Collaborator

mrtazz commented Jan 26, 2023

sorry for the delay. Thanks for taking the time to contribute

@mrtazz mrtazz merged commit c047d51 into checkmake:main Jan 26, 2023
@colindean
Copy link
Contributor Author

Thank you! Could you perhaps do a release so that folks using the pre-commit hook can point to a tag instead of a hash?

@colindean colindean deleted the patch-1 branch January 26, 2023 15:49
@colindean
Copy link
Contributor Author

@mrtazz Any chance for a tag?

@trinitronx trinitronx mentioned this pull request Jul 14, 2024
5 tasks
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