Help needed to enable more golangci-linter

[ccoVeille]

Here is the list of errors I was able to detect via golangci-lint by enabling a lot of rules

951 issues:
* contextcheck: 12
* depguard: 2
* errorlint: 1
* gci: 22
* mirror: 1
* sqlclosecheck: 12
* testifylint: 271
* thelper: 16
* usestdlibvars: 19
* revive: 595
    425 use-any
     89 unused-receiver
     31 import-alias-naming
     24 unhandled-error
      5 unchecked-type-assertion
      5 import-shadowing
      3 early-return
      3 defer
      3 comment-spacings
      2 deep-exit
      2 confusing-naming
      1 modifies-value-receiver
      1 bool-literal-in-expr
      1 bare-return

Please let me know if you want me to help you to add them, I can work on a dedicated file and a dedicated GHA, so it won't cause any problem when merged

[iamgoroot]

There are some really important lints that should be enabled. Especially after looking into the code... Can this be enabled for new code for now? I think current issues can be taken care of later and it seems like gofr has "just throw in support of everything you can think of" in backlog so new code should definitely be checked

[ccoVeille]

Yes, I can enable them for new code only, that's pretty easy I did it for clipse project

• https://github.com/savedra1/clipse/pull/84

[aryanmehrotra]

Minor linters can be fixed in a single PR, but the larger one's needed to be added separately. We would prefer adding with the fix/

[ccoVeille]

788 addresses a part of the issues, once merged more changes will be needed

[ccoVeille]

I will create a PR about using testifylint with updated code, not whole codebase

[ccoVeille]

Once #829 will be merged, here will be the remaining errors

93 issues:

• contextcheck: 12
• sqlclosecheck: 12
• revive: 69

Here is the detail for the 69 errors reported by revive: 31 revive.import-alias-naming 24 revive.unhandled-error 5 revive.unchecked-type-assertion 5 revive.import-shadowing 2 revive.confusing-naming 1 revive.redundant-import-alias 1 revive.modifies-value-receiver

[srijan-27]

@ccoVeille - should I create a PR to add the above specified 3 linters?

[ccoVeille]

Yes, please.

I think they should be addressed in separate PR to ease the review

Some might be obvious and can be grouped, some might require large code rewrite.

You will see by working on them.

[srijan-27]

Sure, yeah I am aware of changes.. just wanted to confirm if you worked on it.