Skip to content
This repository was archived by the owner on Aug 31, 2021. It is now read-only.

[Haskell] v3 config.json stub #51

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Jan 17, 2020
Merged

[Haskell] v3 config.json stub #51

merged 3 commits into from
Jan 17, 2020

Conversation

sshine
Copy link
Contributor

@sshine sshine commented Jan 15, 2020

This stub contains all things necessary but the list of exercises.

The example C# config.json did not contain the fields ignore_pattern and solution_pattern present in Haskell's config.json, but the migration guide also did not speak of deprecating any properties.

For this reason, this PR preserves those properties and adds new ones.

This stub contains all things necessary but the list of exercises.

The example C# config.json did not contain the fields `ignore_pattern`
and `solution_pattern` present in Haskell's config.json, but the
[migration guide][1] also did not speak of deprecating any properties.

For this reason, this PR preserves those properties and adds new ones.

[1]: https://github.com/exercism/v3/blob/master/docs/maintainers/migrating-your-config-json-files.md
@sshine sshine requested a review from a team as a code owner January 15, 2020 14:29
@sshine
Copy link
Contributor Author

sshine commented Jan 15, 2020

Note: I was unable to tag this pull request with a meaningful status/ or type/ label.

sshine and others added 2 commits January 15, 2020 16:14
The config.json is updated with v3 properties in 24cea63.
Co-Authored-By: Tim Austin <tim@neenjaw.com>
@declarationperfume declarationperfume changed the title Haskell: v3 config.json stub [Haskell] v3 config.json stub Jan 16, 2020
@sshine sshine requested a review from neenjaw January 16, 2020 08:01
@ErikSchierboom
Copy link
Member

Note: I was unable to tag this pull request with a meaningful status/ or type/ label.

Could status/in-progress be used here? The types don't fit, I agree.

@sshine
Copy link
Contributor Author

sshine commented Jan 16, 2020

Could status/in-progress be used here? The types don't fit, I agree.

Wouldn't that indicate that I'm not completely done pushing changes?

I'm really looking for a status/done or status/review.

@sshine
Copy link
Contributor Author

sshine commented Jan 16, 2020

Or maybe status/i've-rebased-and-resolved-merge-conflicts-four-times-now-please-merge-this-soon. 😅

@ErikSchierboom
Copy link
Member

I'm really looking for a status/done or status/review.

Hmmm, I'm thinking for PR's these statuses might not make as much sense. Either it is ready for review, or it is not, in which case it should be a draft PR. Would that work?

"exercises": {
"concept": [],
"practice": []
}
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

It looks like the "foregone" exercises have also been removed. See https://github.com/exercism/haskell/blob/dc01f701596c6726b4c6f31acf9e97df840139ef/config.json#L7. Was that intentional?

Copy link
Contributor Author

@sshine sshine Jan 16, 2020

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Sort of. I deliberately didn't add the exercise-specific data because migrating-your-config-json-files.md says:

The existing exercises are temporarily removed from the config.json file. They will return as practice exercises once the concept exercises have been added.

I thought it was slightly strange to mention which practice exercises have been foregone when not mentioning which practice exercises that are implemented. So I thought I would add foregone exercises after I've added practice exercises after I've added 20+ concept exercises. At least that's how I understood the recommended workflow.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

You are entirely correct of course. I'll update the migrate guide to also mention removing the foregone key.

@sshine sshine requested a review from ErikSchierboom January 16, 2020 18:10
Copy link
Member

@petertseng petertseng left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

if there is not yet some sort of automated verification of each config.json, might I suggest that that be added...

for now, I have used jq . as well as diff this config vs the current haskell config.json

@sshine sshine merged commit 8ce0e49 into exercism:master Jan 17, 2020
@sshine sshine deleted the haskell-config-json branch January 17, 2020 06:15
@sshine
Copy link
Contributor Author

sshine commented Jan 17, 2020

some sort of automated verification of each config.json

I contemplated extending configlet, but since it's coded in Go and doesn't come with build instructions, I've put it aside. Also, I'm not sure if the format for concept exercises is set in stone.

Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants