Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Let's consider the ways of automation of the spec validation #23

Open
akhundMurad opened this issue Jul 6, 2023 · 4 comments
Open

Let's consider the ways of automation of the spec validation #23

akhundMurad opened this issue Jul 6, 2023 · 4 comments

Comments

@akhundMurad
Copy link
Contributor

akhundMurad commented Jul 6, 2023

TypeID now has a lot of implementations in different programming languages. Therefore, there should be a way of tracking their validation statuses (against spec). I am wondering about a badge, that can show in the README a validation status (failed, succeed) of the particular library. Nevertheless, there should be better solutions.

@TenCoKaciStromy
Copy link
Contributor

If every implementation had a CLI, a universal test could be done.
I personally would like a test like that. I wouldn't miss any changes in the specification.

@akhundMurad
Copy link
Contributor Author

Also we can implement an GitHub action. However, it's hard to imagine the way of running tests upon the diversity of languages and testing tools

@broothie
Copy link
Contributor

I actually created a workflow that does this! https://github.com/broothie/typeid-ruby/blob/main/.github/workflows/monitor_spec_updates.yml.

It runs on a nightly basis, and it basically just downloads the spec files and creates a PR if there's a diff. The next step would be to make the necessary changes to the implementation to make the specs green again, and merge the PR.

@akhundMurad
Copy link
Contributor Author

@broothie Nice work! Maybe it is worth adding the reference to this workflow in the README.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants