[PR PATCH] python3-ansible-lint: update to 6.13.0.

[PR PATCH] python3-ansible-lint: update to 6.13.0.

[jcgruenhage]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1411 bytes --]

There is a new pull request by jcgruenhage against master on the void-packages repository

https://github.com/jcgruenhage/void-packages python3-ansible-lint-6.13.0_1
https://github.com/void-linux/void-packages/pull/42293

python3-ansible-lint: update to 6.13.0.
<!-- Uncomment relevant sections and delete options which are not applicable -->

#### Testing the changes
- I tested the changes in this PR: **YES**


There was a bug in a new feature that was introduced upstream, which I fixed and submitted upstream. Is it okay to include stuff like this downstream?

<!--
#### New package
- This new package conforms to the [package requirements](https://github.com/void-linux/void-packages/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md#package-requirements): **YES**|**NO**
-->

<!-- Note: If the build is likely to take more than 2 hours, please add ci skip tag as described in
https://github.com/void-linux/void-packages/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md#continuous-integration
and test at least one native build and, if supported, at least one cross build.
Ignore this section if this PR is not skipping CI.
-->
<!--
#### Local build testing
- I built this PR locally for my native architecture, (ARCH-LIBC)
- I built this PR locally for these architectures (if supported. mark crossbuilds):
  - aarch64-musl
  - armv7l
  - armv6l-musl
-->


A patch file from https://github.com/void-linux/void-packages/pull/42293.patch is attached

[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #2: github-pr-python3-ansible-lint-6.13.0_1-42293.patch --]
[-- Type: text/x-diff, Size: 3321 bytes --]

From 0fe65fbf33fd75bb185be4cf491ec3b994f4b813 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: =?UTF-8?q?Jan=20Christian=20Gr=C3=BCnhage?=
 <jan.christian@gruenhage.xyz>
Date: Wed, 15 Feb 2023 20:00:25 +0100
Subject: [PATCH] python3-ansible-lint: update to 6.13.0.

---
 .../0002-fix-ignore-file-generation.patch     | 34 +++++++++++++++++++
 srcpkgs/python3-ansible-lint/template         |  4 +--
 2 files changed, 36 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
 create mode 100644 srcpkgs/python3-ansible-lint/patches/0002-fix-ignore-file-generation.patch

diff --git a/srcpkgs/python3-ansible-lint/patches/0002-fix-ignore-file-generation.patch b/srcpkgs/python3-ansible-lint/patches/0002-fix-ignore-file-generation.patch
new file mode 100644
index 000000000000..7e80279e1b61
--- /dev/null
+++ b/srcpkgs/python3-ansible-lint/patches/0002-fix-ignore-file-generation.patch
@@ -0,0 +1,34 @@
+From 6c1efd11685ec829abcf944159012bd26a50a62c Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
+From: =?UTF-8?q?Jan=20Christian=20Gr=C3=BCnhage?=
+ <jan.christian@gruenhage.xyz>
+Date: Wed, 15 Feb 2023 19:22:48 +0100
+Subject: [PATCH 2/2] fix ignore file generation
+
+Previously, generated ignore files didn't put newlines between separate
+ignores. We're now appending `\n` to each line before writing them out.
+---
+ src/ansiblelint/app.py | 3 +--
+ 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)
+
+diff --git a/src/ansiblelint/app.py b/src/ansiblelint/app.py
+index b87dcc66..8f1c45c0 100644
+--- a/src/ansiblelint/app.py
++++ b/src/ansiblelint/app.py
+@@ -171,13 +171,12 @@ class App:
+             console_stderr.print(f"Writing ignore file to {IGNORE_TXT}")
+             lines = set()
+             for rule in result.matches:
+-                lines.add(f"{rule.filename} {rule.tag}")
++                lines.add(f"{rule.filename} {rule.tag}\n")
+             with open(IGNORE_TXT, "w", encoding="utf-8") as ignore_file:
+                 ignore_file.write(
+                     "# This file contains ignores rule violations for ansible-lint\n"
+                 )
+                 ignore_file.writelines(sorted(list(lines)))
+-                ignore_file.write("\n")
+         elif matched_rules and not self.options.quiet:
+             console_stderr.print(
+                 "Read [link=https://ansible-lint.readthedocs.io/configuring/#ignoring-rules-for-entire-files]documentation[/link] for instructions on how to ignore specific rule violations."
+-- 
+2.39.2
+
diff --git a/srcpkgs/python3-ansible-lint/template b/srcpkgs/python3-ansible-lint/template
index caf694a16080..ed0cb9089e66 100644
--- a/srcpkgs/python3-ansible-lint/template
+++ b/srcpkgs/python3-ansible-lint/template
@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 # Template file for 'python3-ansible-lint'
 pkgname=python3-ansible-lint
-version=6.12.0
+version=6.13.0
 revision=1
 build_style=python3-pep517
 make_install_target="dist/ansible_lint-*-*-*-*.whl"
@@ -18,7 +18,7 @@ maintainer="Jan Christian Grünhage <jan.christian@gruenhage.xyz>"
 license="GPL-3.0-only"
 homepage="https://github.com/ansible/ansible-lint"
 distfiles="${PYPI_SITE}/a/ansible-lint/ansible-lint-${version}.tar.gz"
-checksum=887e88262dbd9e2cbb5b7a70a94d945a8a2791d1467cf30af49c22b60899b40b
+checksum=e2d45d8315729f429cbbefdab446d38050ad7b36d9e3aa1ec1beaf2914d029a0
 # cba anymore, the list of failing tests changes with every update
 make_check="no"
 

Re: [PR PATCH] [Updated] python3-ansible-lint: update to 6.13.0.

[jcgruenhage]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1416 bytes --]

There is an updated pull request by jcgruenhage against master on the void-packages repository

https://github.com/jcgruenhage/void-packages python3-ansible-lint-6.13.0_1
https://github.com/void-linux/void-packages/pull/42293

python3-ansible-lint: update to 6.13.0.
<!-- Uncomment relevant sections and delete options which are not applicable -->

#### Testing the changes
- I tested the changes in this PR: **YES**


There was a bug in a new feature that was introduced upstream, which I fixed and submitted upstream. Is it okay to include stuff like this downstream?

<!--
#### New package
- This new package conforms to the [package requirements](https://github.com/void-linux/void-packages/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md#package-requirements): **YES**|**NO**
-->

<!-- Note: If the build is likely to take more than 2 hours, please add ci skip tag as described in
https://github.com/void-linux/void-packages/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md#continuous-integration
and test at least one native build and, if supported, at least one cross build.
Ignore this section if this PR is not skipping CI.
-->
<!--
#### Local build testing
- I built this PR locally for my native architecture, (ARCH-LIBC)
- I built this PR locally for these architectures (if supported. mark crossbuilds):
  - aarch64-musl
  - armv7l
  - armv6l-musl
-->


A patch file from https://github.com/void-linux/void-packages/pull/42293.patch is attached

[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #2: github-pr-python3-ansible-lint-6.13.0_1-42293.patch --]
[-- Type: text/x-diff, Size: 1254 bytes --]

From 66a0f956be981cd571efbf935da86e41765f7b2d Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: =?UTF-8?q?Jan=20Christian=20Gr=C3=BCnhage?=
 <jan.christian@gruenhage.xyz>
Date: Wed, 15 Feb 2023 20:00:25 +0100
Subject: [PATCH] python3-ansible-lint: update to 6.13.1.

---
 srcpkgs/python3-ansible-lint/template | 4 ++--
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/srcpkgs/python3-ansible-lint/template b/srcpkgs/python3-ansible-lint/template
index caf694a16080..811de14adadd 100644
--- a/srcpkgs/python3-ansible-lint/template
+++ b/srcpkgs/python3-ansible-lint/template
@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 # Template file for 'python3-ansible-lint'
 pkgname=python3-ansible-lint
-version=6.12.0
+version=6.13.1
 revision=1
 build_style=python3-pep517
 make_install_target="dist/ansible_lint-*-*-*-*.whl"
@@ -18,7 +18,7 @@ maintainer="Jan Christian Grünhage <jan.christian@gruenhage.xyz>"
 license="GPL-3.0-only"
 homepage="https://github.com/ansible/ansible-lint"
 distfiles="${PYPI_SITE}/a/ansible-lint/ansible-lint-${version}.tar.gz"
-checksum=887e88262dbd9e2cbb5b7a70a94d945a8a2791d1467cf30af49c22b60899b40b
+checksum=435c12b4fd88da815af6821f3bf8b04ebb651811da89a11c9d190baff21badaa
 # cba anymore, the list of failing tests changes with every update
 make_check="no"
 

Re: python3-ansible-lint: update to 6.13.0.

[paper42]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 346 bytes --]

New comment by paper42 on void-packages repository

https://github.com/void-linux/void-packages/pull/42293#issuecomment-1442451798

Comment:
> There was a bug in a new feature that was introduced upstream, which I fixed and submitted upstream. Is it okay to include stuff like this downstream?

yes if it fixes an issue that's not very obscure

Re: [PR PATCH] [Merged]: python3-ansible-lint: update to 6.13.0.

[paper42]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1230 bytes --]

There's a merged pull request on the void-packages repository

python3-ansible-lint: update to 6.13.0.
https://github.com/void-linux/void-packages/pull/42293

Description:
<!-- Uncomment relevant sections and delete options which are not applicable -->

#### Testing the changes
- I tested the changes in this PR: **YES**


There was a bug in a new feature that was introduced upstream, which I fixed and submitted upstream. Is it okay to include stuff like this downstream?

<!--
#### New package
- This new package conforms to the [package requirements](https://github.com/void-linux/void-packages/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md#package-requirements): **YES**|**NO**
-->

<!-- Note: If the build is likely to take more than 2 hours, please add ci skip tag as described in
https://github.com/void-linux/void-packages/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md#continuous-integration
and test at least one native build and, if supported, at least one cross build.
Ignore this section if this PR is not skipping CI.
-->
<!--
#### Local build testing
- I built this PR locally for my native architecture, (ARCH-LIBC)
- I built this PR locally for these architectures (if supported. mark crossbuilds):
  - aarch64-musl
  - armv7l
  - armv6l-musl
-->

Re: python3-ansible-lint: update to 6.13.0.

[jcgruenhage]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 404 bytes --]

New comment by jcgruenhage on void-packages repository

https://github.com/void-linux/void-packages/pull/42293#issuecomment-1442498123

Comment:
> yes if it fixes an issue that's not very obscure

I'll keep that in mind for the future then. In this case, getting the bug fixed upstream and a new release out was quicker than getting the update in here anyway, so it doesn't really matter in this case.