Skip to content

Conversation

@eranturgeman
Copy link
Contributor

  • All tests passed. If this feature is not already covered by the tests, I added new tests.
  • This pull request is on the dev branch.
  • I used gofmt for formatting the code before submitting the pull request.
  • Update documentation about new features / new supported technologies

This PR simplify the getResultsScanStatus by stop considering several SecurityCommandResults.
Since we Deprecated the Projects and WorkingDirs concepts, it seems like we cannot get several scan results from a single run, therefore we take the scans statuses from the single scan we have.

@eranturgeman eranturgeman added safe to test Approve running integration tests on a pull request ignore for release Automatically generated release notes labels Dec 29, 2025
@github-actions github-actions bot removed the safe to test Approve running integration tests on a pull request label Dec 29, 2025
@eranturgeman eranturgeman added the safe to test Approve running integration tests on a pull request label Dec 30, 2025
@github-actions github-actions bot removed the safe to test Approve running integration tests on a pull request label Dec 30, 2025
@github-actions
Copy link
Contributor

👍 Frogbot scanned this pull request and did not find any new security issues.


@eyalk007
Copy link
Collaborator

eyalk007 commented Jan 1, 2026

only thing to check is to validate if working dir isnt coming back as a concept next q

if it does maybe the simplification isnt worth it
@eranturgeman @orto17

@eranturgeman
Copy link
Contributor Author

eranturgeman commented Jan 1, 2026

only thing to check is to validate if working dir isnt coming back as a concept next q

if it does maybe the simplification isnt worth it @eranturgeman @orto17

This question if in place but if it does come back soon - we need to think if having separate working dirs means separate scans. if not - we still only have one set of results. if we do perform separate scans (I think we should in order to enable defining different settings to different parts of the repo, the cc "modules") so Eyal is correct and this change is not valid
@orto17

@eyalk007 eyalk007 self-requested a review January 1, 2026 15:03
Copy link
Collaborator

@eyalk007 eyalk007 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

lets discuss with or about the nil check

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

ignore for release Automatically generated release notes

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants