ci: give linting its own workflow (#113) #114

Merged

bermudalamb merged 2 commits from feature/113-split-lint-workflow into main 2026-08-22 09:29:16 -05:00

Conversation 0 Commits 2 Files Changed 2

+46 -33

2 Commits

Author	SHA1	Message	Date
bermudalamb	71f8a4357b	Merge branch 'main' into feature/113-split-lint-workflow	2026-08-22 09:29:01 -05:00
bermudalambandClaude Opus 5	e1dc851777	ci: give linting its own workflow (#113) ... The lint job moves out of tests.yml into lint.yml, unchanged in what it runs. Lint is the fastest check in the pipeline and the one most often broken, and reporting it as one job among the suites made a lint failure and a test failure look alike at a glance. The split left two comments in the wrong place, both artifacts of the copy rather than of the intent. tests.yml kept the six-line note explaining the lint policy — that only defect-catching rules fail the build, that everything else warns, and why no --max-warnings flag appears. With the job gone it sat directly above backend-unit, where a reader would fairly take it as describing the unit tests. It has moved to lint.yml, with the job it actually describes. lint.yml inherited tests.yml's header about backend-integration living in its own manual workflow after it held the runner for three hours. That is worth saying where someone might expect integration tests to run; in a workflow that only runs ESLint it explains the absence of something nobody was looking for. Replaced with why this workflow exists at all. Verified by parsing both files rather than by reading them: lint.yml declares one job, lint; tests.yml declares backend-unit and frontend-e2e. No job was lost in the move and none is now declared twice, which is the failure a copy-and-delete edit invites. Refs #113 Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>	2026-08-22 09:22:06 -05:00