-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 508
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
Feature: Separate check for policy/score evaluation #1245
Comments
Cool! Is this part of v4 release? |
no. Just too many checks to migrate :-) v5 or v6. |
@laurentsimon assigning to you for now. |
Thanks for CC'ing me, @laurentsimon! Have you thought of assigning each check a unique ID, and then allowing command-line flags like |
We thought about something along these lines early on. I think we'll achieve what you describe with policies. Once we have the separation of checks vs policy, we'll be able to apply We feel the policies will allow flexibility for advanced users, without bloating the CLI arguments. We will have built-in policies, of course. Wdut? |
Your ideas sound great. (I'm not surprised.) |
glad that it makes sense to you too. Everyone is asking for different exceptions and special cases, policies are the only solution that seemed viable in the end. Let's hope this works |
This issue is stale because it has been open for 60 days with no activity. |
Given the work on structured results, I'm going to mark this issue as obsolete, as it accomplished the same goal of granularity and custom policies |
We need to separate check and its policy evaluation. This will allow us to return 'raw' results for users to apply arbitrary policies.
The first step is to do the separation within the
checks
package. Then all checks are migrated, we will create apkg.RunRawScorecards()
and create our default policy (currently the scores) thru an additional call.We will later expose this in the CLI
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: