Philip Ginsbach

We will not work on any implementation for now. When customers request it, this issue should be a good place to start picking it up again.

Thanks for pinging. The use of parameterised modules here looks good to me, no concerns!

> cc @ginsbach on parameterized module usage (you can restrict your 👀 to [the first commit only](https://github.com/github/codeql/pull/10635/commits/a9710453f4366ebb999b6e383e4cbc71ec364d51)) Always happy to see parameterised module PRs! Wouldn't it be easier to use...

Thank you for this false positive report. Resolving this issue is not a current product priority, but we acknowledge the report and will track it internally for future consideration, or...

Hi @erzz, Thank you for the question! The annotation is not faulty (cf. our documentation [here](https://docs.github.com/en/code-security/code-scanning/creating-an-advanced-setup-for-code-scanning/customizing-your-advanced-setup-for-code-scanning#specifying-directories-to-scan)). The `paths` array only has an effect on interpreted languages. For compiled languages (such...

I have asked the Go team for a clarification.

> How can I download standard libraries locally? Preferably stored as some sort of structured data, please! You can get a local copy of the standard libraries by cloning the...

> Thank you! But the codeql/docs/ql-libraries/ directory only has one folder dataflow and one file in it, where do I need to find the rest? The _codeql_ repository contains all...

Thank you for filing this issue! The FP should be removed by https://github.com/github/codeql/pull/12886, so release 2.16.3 should resolve it.

Thank you for reporting this. Our current policy is to not give priority to false positives, but we acknowledge this and will track it internally for future consideration.