Packages with no violations should have their files removed

[gmcgibbon]

What are you trying to accomplish?

Packages with TODOs that are done should have their files deleted once no more violations remain.

What approach did you choose and why?

Dif the package set in the run context from the one in the offense collection and delete any that shouldn't have TODOs but do.

What should reviewers focus on?

Does this approach make sense?

Type of Change

• Bugfix
• New feature
• Non-breaking change (a change that doesn't alter functionality - i.e., code refactor, configs, etc.)

Checklist

• I have updated the documentation accordingly.
• I have added tests to cover my changes.
• It is safe to rollback this change.

[alexevanczuk]

This seems reasonable to me! A couple of small questions, but otherwise I think the approach makes sense. The only tradeoff I see here is that bin/packwerk update-todo path/to/specific/file.rb will produce unexpected results if path/to/specific/file.rb has no offenses, since presumably that would mean no TODO would be registered, meaning we'd delete the containing pack's TODO file.

I think that's fine because I think running update-todo on specific files is not really supported -- only running on the whole codebase or specific packs is supported.

[gmcgibbon]

The only tradeoff I see here is that bin/packwerk update-todo path/to/specific/file.rb will produce unexpected results if path/to/specific/file.rb has no offenses, since presumably that would mean no TODO would be registered, meaning we'd delete the containing pack's TODO file.

I think that's fine because I think running update-todo on specific files is not really supported -- only running on the whole codebase or specific packs is supported.

Agree. Maybe we should make the command not work with a file, or warn and run with . automatically.