chore(lint): enable errorlint

[janishorsts]

Blocked by #298

[github-actions]

➖ Are we earthbuild yet?

No change in "earthly" occurrences

📈 Overall Progress

Branch	Total Count
main	5659
This PR	5659
Difference	+0

---

Keep up the great work migrating from Earthly to Earthbuild! 🚀

💡 Tips for finding more occurrences

Run locally to see detailed breakdown:

./.github/scripts/count-earthly.sh

Note that the goal is not to reach 0.
There is anticipated to be at least some occurences of earthly in the source code due to backwards compatibility with config files and language constructs.

[gemini-code-assist]

Summary of Changes

Hello @janishorsts, I'm Gemini Code Assist¹! I'm currently reviewing this pull request and will post my feedback shortly. In the meantime, here's a summary to help you and other reviewers quickly get up to speed!

This pull request focuses on a significant refactoring of error handling within the codebase. It systematically replaces direct error equality checks and type assertions with the more robust and idiomatic errors.Is and errors.As functions. This change is crucial for correctly handling wrapped errors, enhancing the reliability and maintainability of the application's error management. Additionally, the errorlint linter has been disabled, which is a common step when undertaking such a widespread error handling refactor.

Highlights

• Linter Configuration Update: The errorlint linter has been disabled in the .golangci.yaml configuration. This change likely precedes or accompanies the widespread refactoring of error handling to prevent conflicts or unnecessary warnings from the linter.
• Idiomatic Error Handling Refactor: Numerous error comparison checks across the codebase have been refactored to utilize the errors.Is and errors.As functions. This update aligns the error handling with modern Go best practices, ensuring correct comparison of wrapped errors and improving the robustness and maintainability of error management.

Using Gemini Code Assist

The full guide for Gemini Code Assist can be found on our documentation page, here are some quick tips.

Invoking Gemini

You can request assistance from Gemini at any point by creating a comment using either /gemini <command> or @gemini-code-assist <command>. Below is a summary of the supported commands on the current page.

Feature	Command	Description
Code Review	/gemini review	Performs a code review for the current pull request in its current state.
Pull Request Summary	/gemini summary	Provides a summary of the current pull request in its current state.
Comment	@gemini-code-assist	Responds in comments when explicitly tagged, both in pull request comments and review comments.
Help	/gemini help	Displays a list of available commands.

Customization

To customize Gemini Code Assist for GitHub experience, repository maintainers can create a configuration file and/or provide a custom code review style guide (such as PEP-8 for Python) by creating and adding files to a .gemini/ folder in the base of the repository. Detailed instructions can be found here.

Limitations & Feedback

Gemini Code Assist may make mistakes. Please leave feedback on any instances where its feedback is incorrect or counter productive. You can react with 👍 and 👎 on @gemini-code-assist comments. If you're interested in giving your feedback about your experience with Gemini Code Assist for Github and other Google products, sign up here.

You can also get AI-powered code generation, chat, as well as code reviews directly in the IDE at no cost with the Gemini Code Assist IDE Extension.

Footnotes

1. Review the Privacy Notices, Generative AI Prohibited Use Policy, Terms of Service, and learn how to configure Gemini Code Assist in GitHub here. Gemini can make mistakes, so double check it and use code with caution. ↩

[gemini-code-assist]

Code Review

This pull request enables the errorlint linter and applies the necessary fixes across the codebase. The changes are generally excellent, replacing direct error comparisons with errors.Is and type assertions with errors.As, which improves error handling robustness. I've found a couple of areas for improvement, specifically regarding a test case that appears to have been broken during refactoring and an opportunity to standardize on the standard library's errors package.