[#139] [#168] [#195] Ignore build-related files

[Sereja313]

Description

Problem: At the moment, we're using the ignored option for mainly 2 purposes: 1) to ignore all files in the .git folder (.git/**/*) to ignore all build-related temporary files (the default config ignores .stack-work/**/*). A more robust alternative might be to ignore all files implicitly ignored by git.

Solution: Use git ls-files to ignore all files implicitly ignored by git.

Related issue(s)

Fixes #139
Fixes #168
Fixes #195

✅ Checklist for your Pull Request

Ideally a PR has all of the checkmarks set.

If something in this list is irrelevant to your PR, you should still set this
checkmark indicating that you are sure it is dealt with (be that by irrelevance).

Related changes (conditional)

• Tests

  • If I added new functionality, I added tests covering it.
  • If I fixed a bug, I added a regression test to prevent the bug from
    silently reappearing again.

• Documentation

  • I checked whether I should update the docs and did so if necessary:
    • README
    • Haddock

• Public contracts

  • Any modifications of public contracts comply with the Evolution
    of Public Contracts policy.
  • I added an entry to the changelog if my changes are visible to the users
    and
  • provided a migration guide for breaking changes if possible

Stylistic guide (mandatory)

• My commits comply with the policy used in Serokell.
• My code complies with the style guide.

✓ Release Checklist

• I updated the version number in package.yaml.
• I updated the changelog and moved everything
  under the "Unreleased" section to a new section for this release version.
• (After merging) I edited the auto-release.
  • Change the tag and title using the format vX.Y.Z.
  • Write a summary of all user-facing changes.
  • Deselect the "This is a pre-release" checkbox at the bottom.
• (After merging) I updated xrefcheck-action.

[Sorokin-Anton]

Am I right that now we check only staged files? And what about links to unstaged ones - will we report them?
I don't like that we scan files in their current form (so unstaged changes are checked), but only staged files.
Maybe it's better to ignore only files that are explicitly ignored?

Another comment - I am not sure that xrefcheck should work only with Git repos (and before this commit we can run this in any folder)

So I think there should be CLI opt and config flag to disable "git ls-files" usage

[Sereja313]

@Sorokin-Anton

Am I right that now we check only staged files?

Yes, now we only check files tracked by git.

And what about links to unstaged ones - will we report them?

Oh, indeed links to untracked files are still valid. Thank you for noticing that!

I don't like that we scan files in their current form (so unstaged changes are checked), but only staged files.
Maybe it's better to ignore only files that are explicitly ignored?

True, but before that commit we still check unstaged changes and also have to specify ignored files twice(for git and for xrefcheck). Not sure if it makes sense to check untracked files.

Another comment - I am not sure that xrefcheck should work only with Git repos (and before this commit we can run this in any folder)

Here is quote from issue comments

We really support only git repositories, since we have a mode option that affects how anchors should be rendered.

[Sorokin-Anton]

We really support only git repositories

@dcastro what do you think about making an option to disable "git ls-files" call? For example, someone can use xrefcheck on directory which is served by FTP server. I think it's better to give not perfect reports (when talking about rendering GitHub/GitLab anchors) then don't give any

[Sereja313]

Looks like #168 is no longer an issue. Added test.

[Sorokin-Anton]

IDK should we add tests on CI which checks new behavior (git ls-files`), by the way. We can make bats script that generate new repository in temp dir, if we really need this

[Sereja313]

Added tests

[Sereja313]

Rebased on top of #194. Also #195 is no longer an issue.

[Sereja313]

Also fixed a bug where the --verbose option displayed all tracked files, not just scanned ones.