Skip to content

Conversation

Pkylas007
Copy link
Collaborator

@Pkylas007 Pkylas007 commented Aug 4, 2025

@Pkylas007 Pkylas007 changed the title MTA 5637 Initial configuration MTA 5637 Initial configuration for Developer Lightspeed Aug 4, 2025
@Pkylas007 Pkylas007 changed the title MTA 5637 Initial configuration for Developer Lightspeed MTA 5637 Initial Configuration for Developer Lightspeed Aug 4, 2025
@Pkylas007 Pkylas007 changed the title MTA 5637 Initial Configuration for Developer Lightspeed WIP: MTA 5637 Initial Configuration for Developer Lightspeed Aug 4, 2025
@Pkylas007 Pkylas007 changed the title WIP: MTA 5637 Initial Configuration for Developer Lightspeed WIP: MTA 5637 Initial Configurations for Developer Lightspeed Aug 4, 2025
@Pkylas007 Pkylas007 changed the title WIP: MTA 5637 Initial Configurations for Developer Lightspeed MTA 5637 Initial Configurations for Developer Lightspeed Aug 5, 2025
@Pkylas007 Pkylas007 changed the title MTA 5637 Initial Configurations for Developer Lightspeed MTA-5378 Initial Configurations for Developer Lightspeed Aug 11, 2025
@Pkylas007 Pkylas007 force-pushed the mta-5637-initial-configuration branch from fb6c9e9 to c019c9b Compare August 18, 2025 11:37
Copy link
Member

@jwmatthews jwmatthews left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@Pkylas007 I read over and think the content is looking good.

I do want you to be aware of a potential need to distinguish between "MTA" and "MTA with Developer Lightspeed". Or to be more accurate, I am not positive a change is needed in what you wrote, more I wanted to be sure you understand that we are serving 2 use-cases with this single extension.

We need to consider that the single IDE extension we publish to the Marketplace will satisfy 2 use-cases. We can call the use-cases:

  • "MTA" - The basic use-case of static code analysis
  • "MTA with Developer Lightspeed" - The generative AI use-case of working with a LLM to get a code suggestion/fix for a specific analysis issue.

I assume we can publish one document to cover both use-cases, we may need to change up a little where we refer to "MTA" vs "MTA with Developer Lightspeed".

The rough idea is consider static code analysis is "MTA", when we are working with a LLM its "MTA with Developer Lightspeed".

====
You must configure either target or source tehcnologies before running an analysis.
====
|Set rules|Enable default rules and Select your custom rule that you want {mta-dl-plugin} to use for an analysis. You can use the custom rules in addition to the default rules.
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I am not sure, but worth considering we may want to refer to the Analysis capabilties as "MTA" so that the doc portion for that is covering both "MTA" and "MTA with Developer Lightspeed". Then use the "MTA with Developer Lightspeed" just for the Generative AI portions.

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Thank you, John! I have modified the description for Set rules. In the intro, I have explained that the analysis part if run by MTA and MTA with Developer Lightspeed generates code fixes for issues found in an MTA analysis.

@Pkylas007
Copy link
Collaborator Author

@Pkylas007 I read over and think the content is looking good.

I do want you to be aware of a potential need to distinguish between "MTA" and "MTA with Developer Lightspeed". Or to be more accurate, I am not positive a change is needed in what you wrote, more I wanted to be sure you understand that we are serving 2 use-cases with this single extension.

We need to consider that the single IDE extension we publish to the Marketplace will satisfy 2 use-cases. We can call the use-cases:

  • "MTA" - The basic use-case of static code analysis
  • "MTA with Developer Lightspeed" - The generative AI use-case of working with a LLM to get a code suggestion/fix for a specific analysis issue.

I assume we can publish one document to cover both use-cases, we may need to change up a little where we refer to "MTA" vs "MTA with Developer Lightspeed".

The rough idea is consider static code analysis is "MTA", when we are working with a LLM its "MTA with Developer Lightspeed".

Hi @jwmatthews ,
Much appreciate your clarification!

I am working on clarifying that the MTA with Developer Lightspeed component suggests code changes in all my PRs for the Developer Lightspeed guide. I am also making changes in the PRs to describe that Developer Lightspeed is an opt-in component of MTA and that without Developer Lightspeed, users can run analysis by using MTA.

However, the new guide is aimed only at describing the Developer Lightspeed component of MTA at length. We already have separate guides for VS Code extension, CLI, and web console where users can run analysis by using MTA.

Prabha Kylasamiyer Sundara Rajan added 2 commits September 10, 2025 13:20
Signed-off-by: Prabha Kylasamiyer Sundara Rajan <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Prabha Kylasamiyer Sundara Rajan <[email protected]>
include::topics/templates/document-attributes.adoc[]
:_mod-docs-content-type: ASSEMBLY
[id="mta-developer-lightspeed"]
= MTA Developer Lightspeed
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Suggested change
= MTA Developer Lightspeed
= Configuring and Using Developer Lightspeed for MTA

@Pkylas007
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Closing this PR since the final changes are available in #208

@Pkylas007 Pkylas007 closed this Sep 20, 2025
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants