Filter inactive repos from search results #282
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
jphager2
force-pushed
the
filter_inactive_repos
branch
from
677e6b6 to
c5efd6d
Compare
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Hello, sorry for this unsolicited pull request.
The purpose of this change is to allow for inactive repos to be filtered out of the search results. If you work for a company (or hey maybe you just have a lot of repos), you are likely to have ones that are inactive, but you still want to keep them around. It would be nice for hound to have the ability to ignore those repos, since sometimes you just want to check something in your active codebase.
In
config.json, you can use"inactive": trueto mark a repo as inactive. In the ui, there is anIgnore Inactivecheckbox to filter these from the search results.I apologize if this is too specific of a feature. It could have maybe been implemented as part of #97 or some more general case. I would be happy to try and rework it if the idea seems valid, but implementation is not acceptable.