Use full names for linked and keg_only checks

[gibfahn]

---

Commits (oldest to newest)

9dfc103 fix(install): use full names for linked and keg_only checks

Minimal repro:

❯ brew bundle --file - <<<'tap "gibfahn/tap", "https://github.com/gibfahn/homebrew-tap"
tap "gibfahn/tap2", "https://github.com/gibfahn/homebrew-tap"

brew "gibfahn/tap/check-sieve"'

Using gibfahn/tap
Using gibfahn/tap2
Using gibfahn/tap/check-sieve
Error: Formulae found in multiple taps:
       * gibfahn/tap/check-sieve
       * gibfahn/tap2/check-sieve

Please use the fully-qualified name (e.g. gibfahn/tap/check-sieve) to refer to a specific formula.

If you run with HOMEBREW_DEBUG=1 you can see that the cause of this is
using the @name rather than the @full_name in the checks run after
the installation is complete.

[MikeMcQuaid]

Thanks @gibfahn for your first contribution here, you rock!

For future reference: the "Commits (oldest to newest)" and "fix(install)" stuff here doesn't really match our typical commit/PR format so makes it a bit harder to read and review.

[gibfahn]

For future reference: the "Commits (oldest to newest)"

Fair point, that header is just noise when there's one commit anyway. I updated my PR creation script to remove that.

our typical commit/PR format

I didn't see a PR template in this repo, is there a standard one used across brew repos?

"fix(install)" stuff

I had a look at recent commits, seems like some commits do use Conventional Commit messages, some don't. I couldn't work out what the rules were. Maybe "we use all the Conventional Commit types except fix/feat/refactor, for those we just use the scope bit"?

• 1c08091 chore: fix typo
• aa2afe3 build(deps): bump ruby/setup-ruby from 1.205.0 to 1.206.0
• 9a6c62f workflows: use full version numbers
• 62f4b79 .rubocop.yml: update to match main configuration
• 175b594 stale-issues.yml: update to match main configuration
• 45c1886 actionlint.yml: update to match main configuration

[MikeMcQuaid]

I didn't see a PR template in this repo, is there a standard one used across brew repos?

There's not a standard one, no.

I had a look at recent commits, seems like some commits do use Conventional Commit messages, some don't. I couldn't work out what the rules were.

We don't ever intentionally recommend or require Conventional Commit messages.

Maybe "we use all the Conventional Commit types except fix/feat/refactor, for those we just use the scope bit"?

Yeh, maybe.