You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
then foo:bar:baz-qux will be omitted from the output.
My first thought is that if an ignoredPattern has a full artifact name, we should take that as an exact match pattern vs a substring, but this could break existing users if they're depending on that behavior, and also possibly break the version matching. We could also introduce some fancy wildcard or regex support.
It was intended in the sense that I did not consider the use case you are describing. I didn't reckon anyone would want to include a sub artifact (which I assume foo:bar:bas-qux is) among the licenses, but not the main artifact (foo:bar:bas), while still depending on both in the project.
Then again, "ignoredPatterns" should perhaps refer to complete regex pattern matches, not just a contains check, as it's currently implemented. This would be a breaking change though, as you point out.
Not sure if this is intended or a bug.
If my app has artifacts:
foo:bar:baz
foo:bar:baz-qux
and I configure the following exclusion:
then
foo:bar:baz-qux
will be omitted from the output.My first thought is that if an ignoredPattern has a full artifact name, we should take that as an exact match pattern vs a substring, but this could break existing users if they're depending on that behavior, and also possibly break the version matching. We could also introduce some fancy wildcard or regex support.
cc @mudkiplex since they authored the PR
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: