search

arunvelsriram / ktlint-ruleset-junit

Custom ktlint ruleset for linting JUnit tests.
7 stars 2 forks source link

New rule: Fail if test has no assertions #3

Closed arunvelsriram closed 5 years ago

DeMack commented 5 years ago

PR: https://github.com/arunvelsriram/ktlint-ruleset-junit/pull/6

arunvelsriram commented 5 years ago

Readme needs to be updated

DeMack commented 5 years ago

Given that at the end of the current issues, there will only be three rules, it's not a huge issue, but assuming that this will eventually become a fully-fledged library, having all the rules individually in the initial README will get unwieldy and intimidating for a new user. If you'd like, I can set up a second doc that will serve to house all the details and just link to each one in the README. It's definitely not a huge deal for just three rules, so I'm good either way.

Another thought is that it might not be a bad idea to migrate the rule details to a wiki.

DeMack commented 5 years ago

PR for README update: https://github.com/arunvelsriram/ktlint-ruleset-junit/pull/7

arunvelsriram commented 5 years ago

Yes, agree that readme is not the right place for all the rules.

Let's wait for some time and once we start to see it grow we shall bring in a wiki/doc. What do you think?

DeMack commented 5 years ago

I think that sounds perfect. The PR should be good to merge, then.

arunvelsriram commented 5 years ago

What's your thought on using a table for the current readme? We could also simplify the example or provide examples only when required.

DeMack commented 5 years ago

I think a table would probably just get too cluttered. Since there are so few rules right now, it's fairly easy to see everything at a glance, so I don't think we should spend too much effort on organization just yet.

That said, once it gets to 5+ a table could be useful to give a high level overview, with examples in the wiki.

arunvelsriram commented 5 years ago

Makes sense.