NEW(pmd): @W-17605554@: Add tag based on ruleset name to standard rules that are referenced from custom ruleset #211
Conversation
stephen-carter-at-sf
force-pushed
the
sc/W-17605554
branch
from
6384d16 to
da0243b
Compare
| @@ -212,7 +212,7 @@ void whenDescribeRulesIsGivenCustomRulesetThatContainsNameOfStandardRule_thenCus | |||
| PmdRuleInfo ruleInfo = assertContainsOneRuleWithNameAndLanguage(ruleInfoList, "ApexCRUDViolation", "apex"); | |||
| assertThat(ruleInfo.description, is("Sample ApexCRUDViolation description")); | |||
| assertThat(ruleInfo.externalInfoUrl, is("https://ApexCRUDViolation.com")); | |||
| assertThat(ruleInfo.ruleSet, is("sampleRuleset")); | |||
| assertThat(ruleInfo.ruleSets, is(List.of("sampleRuleset", "Security"))); | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is basically the reason for the JAVA changes... to keep tags for all rulesets that the rule was referenced from.
| priority: string, | ||
| ruleSetFile: string, | ||
| class: string |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This isn't needed. It was left over from previous work and I forgot to remove it.
| // Also test that when a bundled PMD rule is referenced inside a custom ruleset, that we update the rule | ||
| // with the tag associated with the custom ruleset's name. | ||
| const overriddenRuleDescription: RuleDescription = expectContainsRuleWithName(ruleDescriptions, 'DebugsShouldUseLoggingLevel'); // From somecat3.xml | ||
| expect(overriddenRuleDescription.tags).toEqual(['Recommended', 'BestPractices', 'Apex', 'SomeCat3']); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is the big win... we get both 'BestPractices' from the standard ruleset... and we get 'SomeCat3' from the custom ruleset.
Now users who specify custom ruleset files that also mention standard rules (or other custom rules) can run that entire ruleset using the tag based off of the ruleset name.
| @@ -206,7 +211,7 @@ describe('Tests for the describeRules method of PmdEngine', () => { | |||
|
|
|||
| const fakeRule1Description: RuleDescription = expectContainsRuleWithName(ruleDescriptions, 'fakerule1'); // From rulesets_apex_rules1.jar | |||
| expect(fakeRule1Description.severityLevel).toEqual(SeverityLevel.Moderate); | |||
| expect(fakeRule1Description.tags).toEqual(['Recommended', 'Categories1', 'Apex', 'Custom']); | |||
| expect(fakeRule1Description.tags).toEqual(['Recommended', 'Rulesets1', 'Apex', 'Custom']); | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This fixes an issue where before it was referring to the parent ruleset instead of the explicitly provided ruleset.
…es that are referenced from custom ruleset
stephen-carter-at-sf
force-pushed
the
sc/W-17605554
branch
from
da0243b to
7a7cb2f
Compare
|
|
||
| // Add rule info | ||
| PmdRuleInfo pmdRuleInfo = new PmdRuleInfo(); | ||
| pmdRuleInfo.name = rule.getName(); | ||
| pmdRuleInfo.languageId = language; | ||
| pmdRuleInfo.description = getLimitedDescription(rule); | ||
| pmdRuleInfo.externalInfoUrl = rule.getExternalInfoUrl(); | ||
| pmdRuleInfo.ruleSet = rule.getRuleSetName(); | ||
| pmdRuleInfo.ruleSets.add(ruleSet.getName()); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This fixes an issue that I also discovered where it uses the top level ruleset name instead of the explicitely provided ruleset name.
For example if you have a jar containing 1 ruleset file A that references a rule from another ruleset file B within the same jar file... but the user only specifies ruleset file A... then we shouldn't tag the rule with B but with A. You'll see I updated a test to fix this on the typescript side.
No description provided.