badges for executable-only packages are messed up
Nobody has claimed this yet.
- Dominant language
- Rust
- Stars
- 1.2k
- Forks
- 232
- Avg merge
- 11h 35m
- Merged PRs (30d)
- 60
Description
I filed this downstream but as noted in that description, docs.rs isn't really giving shield.io much to work with to handle the issue.
Downstream issue: https://github.com/badges/shields/issues/8440
Either builds.json should set build_status: true (?) for executables, or it should include an extra flag saying "oh this was just an executable, there was nothing to build".
("Why are you even using the shield" -- because it's a common idiom and what a lot of people reflexively reach for when checking for docs, even if it will just link something containing the README again, with just a bit more metadata like flags.)
Contributor guide
No contributing guide indexed for this repository
First steps
- Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
- Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
- Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
- Open a pull request that references the issue number.
Research direction
Start with the builds.json generation path and inspect how executable-only packages are represented. Compare that output with the expectations described in downstream Shields issue #8440, then define a result that lets the badge distinguish a successful build from a package with nothing to build. Done when the generated metadata communicates this case clearly to the downstream consumer.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Assessment
- Tech stack
- rust
- Domain
- build-system
- Issue type
- Bug
- Difficulty
- 4/5
- Estimated time
- 3-5 days
- Activity status
- Stale
- Clarity
- Mostly clear
- Newbie friendliness
- 35/100