Configure Mend Bolt for GitHub

[mend-bolt-for-github]

Welcome to Mend Bolt for GitHub (formerly WhiteSource). This is an onboarding PR to help you understand and configure settings before Mend starts scanning your repository for security vulnerabilities.

🚦 Mend Bolt for GitHub will start scanning your repository only once you merge this Pull Request. To disable Mend Bolt for GitHub, simply close this Pull Request.

---

What to Expect

This PR contains a '.whitesource' configuration file which can be customized to your needs. If no changes were applied to this file, Mend Bolt for GitHub will use the default configuration.

Before merging this PR, Make sure the Issues tab is enabled. Once you merge this PR, Mend Bolt for GitHub will scan your repository and create a GitHub Issue for every vulnerability detected in your repository.

If you do not want a GitHub Issue to be created for each detected vulnerability, you can edit the '.whitesource' file and set the 'minSeverityLevel' parameter to 'NONE'.

---

❓ Got questions? Check out Mend Bolt for GitHub docs.
If you need any further assistance then you can also request help here.

[performance-testing-bot]

Unable to locate .performanceTestingBot config file

[pull-request-quantifier-deprecated]

This PR has 9 quantified lines of changes. In general, a change size of upto 200 lines is ideal for the best PR experience!

---

Quantification details

Label      : Extra Small
Size       : +9 -0
Percentile : 3.6%

Total files changed: 1

Change summary by file extension:
.whitesource : +9 -0

Change counts above are quantified counts, based on the PullRequestQuantifier customizations.

Why proper sizing of changes matters

Optimal pull request sizes drive a better predictable PR flow as they strike a
balance between between PR complexity and PR review overhead. PRs within the
optimal size (typical small, or medium sized PRs) mean:

• Fast and predictable releases to production:
  • Optimal size changes are more likely to be reviewed faster with fewer
    iterations.
  • Similarity in low PR complexity drives similar review times.
• Review quality is likely higher as complexity is lower:
  • Bugs are more likely to be detected.
  • Code inconsistencies are more likely to be detected.
• Knowledge sharing is improved within the participants:
  • Small portions can be assimilated better.
• Better engineering practices are exercised:
  • Solving big problems by dividing them in well contained, smaller problems.
  • Exercising separation of concerns within the code changes.

What can I do to optimize my changes

• Use the PullRequestQuantifier to quantify your PR accurately
  • Create a context profile for your repo using the context generator
  • Exclude files that are not necessary to be reviewed or do not increase the review complexity. Example: Autogenerated code, docs, project IDE setting files, binaries, etc. Check out the Excluded section from your prquantifier.yaml context profile.
  • Understand your typical change complexity, drive towards the desired complexity by adjusting the label mapping in your prquantifier.yaml context profile.
  • Only use the labels that matter to you, see context specification to customize your prquantifier.yaml context profile.
• Change your engineering behaviors
  • For PRs that fall outside of the desired spectrum, review the details and check if:
    • Your PR could be split in smaller, self-contained PRs instead
    • Your PR only solves one particular issue. (For example, don't refactor and code new features in the same PR).

How to interpret the change counts in git diff output

• One line was added: +1 -0
• One line was deleted: +0 -1
• One line was modified: +1 -1 (git diff doesn't know about modified, it will
  interpret that line like one addition plus one deletion)
• Change percentiles: Change characteristics (addition, deletion, modification)
  of this PR in relation to all other PRs within the repository.

---

Was this comment helpful? 👍  :ok_hand:  :thumbsdown: (Email)
Customize PullRequestQuantifier for this repository.

[changelogg]

Hey! Changelogs info seems to be missing or might be in incorrect format.
Please use the below template in PR description to ensure Changelogg can detect your changes:
- (tag) changelog_text
or
- tag: changelog_text
OR
You can add tag in PR header or while doing a commit too
(tag) PR header
or
tag: PR header
Valid tags: added / feat, changed, deprecated, fixed / fix, removed, security, build, ci, chore, docs, perf, refactor, revert, style, test
Thanks!
For more info, check out changelogg docs

[vizipi]

Pull request analysis by VIZIPI

Below you will find who is the most qualified team member to review your code.
This analysis includes his/her work on the code included in this Pull request, in addition to their experience in code affected by these changes ( partly found within the list of potential missing files below )   Feedback always welcome

No other active qualified developers found to review these specific changes. You might consider involving more team members with these code segments.

---

Potential missing files from this Pull request

No files found with a 40% threashold :)
No commonly committed files found with a 40% threashold