search

codeclimate / codeclimate-rubocop

Code Climate Engine for Rubocop
MIT License
60 stars 44 forks source link

Why are channels necessary? #276

Open monfresh opened 3 years ago

monfresh commented 3 years ago

I couldn't find a clear explanation of why CodeClimate has to keep adding versions of Rubocop to the channels. Is it not possible to install the version of Rubocop that is specified in the Gemfile.lock and then analyze the PR using that version? It seems like CodeClimate is always behind in terms of adding the latest version of Rubocop to the channels.

If I don't specify the channel option in the .codeclimate config, it looks like CodeClimate uses version 0.52 of Rubocop. Why such an old version?

monfresh commented 3 years ago

Doing a quick search for alternatives in the GitHub Actions marketplace, I found reviewdog, and they offer the following options for setting the rubocop version, which sound very reasonable:

What is different about Code Climate that prevents it from having the Rubocop integration be this user-friendly? Would it not be a win-win for both the Code Climate team to not have to keep track of Rubocop releases and remember to manually add a new version of Rubocop to the channels, and for your customers to be happier and not have to wait for a particular version to be added to the channel?

klyonrad commented 3 years ago

channels are necessary because the codeclimate business does not prioritize appeasing the ruby dev ecosystem.

As I have written in an older comment I consider it the number one reason why I'd never advocate moving beyond the free plan for it.

The issue that you have written now is a

Duplicate of #93

monfresh commented 3 years ago

Thanks @klyonrad. I didn't see that issue! Maybe the more people make noise, the more they'll listen?