Skip to content

Conversation

@bjlittle
Copy link
Member

@bjlittle bjlittle commented Apr 25, 2024

We have some exceptions to the rule (some of which we can address), but it's best that we adopt the repo-review hook now to ensure that we don't regress.

@codecov-commenter
Copy link

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 89.51%. Comparing base (fea1607) to head (74667ed).

Additional details and impacted files
@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main     #456   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   89.51%   89.51%           
=======================================
  Files           8        8           
  Lines        2450     2450           
  Branches      416      416           
=======================================
  Hits         2193     2193           
  Misses        161      161           
  Partials       96       96           

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

@bjlittle bjlittle requested a review from pp-mo April 25, 2024 15:53
Copy link
Member

@pp-mo pp-mo left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Looks cool !
I assume the simple "sp-repo-review ... Passed" line in the pre-commit actions output is all the evidence I need that this is working as intended

@pp-mo pp-mo merged commit c0b68b7 into SciTools:main Apr 25, 2024
@pp-mo
Copy link
Member

pp-mo commented Apr 25, 2024

Oooh, I missed something ...
@bjlittle is there a badge we could adopt to highlight/promote the use of repo-check ?

@bjlittle
Copy link
Member Author

That would be nice, but not that I know of

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