Skip to content

Created 3 new instance scan checks (Table Check) & Updated the README.md document. #171

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

Conversation

vijaytalupula
Copy link
Contributor

a) Created THREE new instance scan checks of the class type "Table Check" as follows,

Manageability:
1. Always keep code/snippet in functions - Business Rules.
2. Update set In Progress/Completed previously Ignored.

Performance:
1. Catalog Client script with GlideRecord API calls.

b) Updated the README.md document as well for the same.

vijaytalupula and others added 2 commits October 30, 2024 13:17
Updated the README.md file with below 3 following additions,

1. Under manageability category,
   - Always keep code/snippet in functions - Business Rules.
   - Update set In Progress/Completed previously Ignored.
2. Under performance category,
   - Catalog Client script with GlideRecord API calls.
@SapphicFire SapphicFire self-assigned this Oct 31, 2024
Copy link
Contributor

@SapphicFire SapphicFire left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Thank you for your contribution. However, two of the checks do not behave as documented. Please review the files you have changed/added and ensure that all modifications are correct.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This does not validate whether the code is enclosed in a function. This looks for the text function. I could write a comment such as:

// I hope this code functions as expected

and it would match the value. I recommend removing this one so we can accept this PR, and then submitting a separate one that users a linter check to validate this behaviour

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This does not validate whether the GlideRecord object is used. This looks for the text GlideRecord. I could write a comment such as:

// Using GlideAjax instead of GlideRecord as requested

and it would match the value. I recommend removing this one so we can accept this PR, and then submitting a separate one that users a linter check to validate this behaviour

@vijaytalupula
Copy link
Contributor Author

Thanks for your review and feedback @SapphicFire. I have created a new branch with new pull request.

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

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants