Closed jameslamb closed 1 month ago
I'm surprised there were no shellcheck failures, theres usually at least one nitpick whenever you add a new linter
Yeah same! Should have put it in the description of the PR... I did actually test that this was working by adding something to one of those shell scripts which I knew would trigger the linter. Ran pre-commit run --all-files
and saw it report the error I expected. So it is really running shellcheck
and finding the right files.
Proposes adding
shellcheck
to the pre-commit checks, to look for issues in shell scripts here.This is done via
shellcheck-py
(https://pypi.org/project/shellcheck-py/), a repackaging ofshellcheck
for PyPI that allows it to be used in pre-commit without needing a separate system installation.Notes for Reviewers
Right now there are just 2 little shell scripts in this repo: https://github.com/search?q=repo%3Arapidsai%2Fdeployment%20path%3A**%2F*.sh&type=code
Both are used as the entrypoints in bring-your-own-container SageMaker examples. So the additional coverage we get from this check, in the current state of the repo, is pretty small.
But it's lightweight to install and runs fast, and could help to catch issues in those scripts or others we add in the future, so on balance I think it's worth adding.
why is the
ruff
version in pre-commit changing?As part of this, I also ran
And that pulled in the latest version of
ruff
. Figured we might as well, while touching that file anyway.