Skip to content

ci: standardize actions #56

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jan 23, 2025
Merged

ci: standardize actions #56

merged 1 commit into from
Jan 23, 2025

Conversation

stdavis
Copy link
Member

@stdavis stdavis commented Jan 23, 2025

No description provided.

Copy link

codecov bot commented Jan 23, 2025

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 100.00%. Comparing base (59d8c6a) to head (79146d0).
Report is 23 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff            @@
##              main       #56   +/-   ##
=========================================
  Coverage   100.00%   100.00%           
=========================================
  Files            2         2           
  Lines            9         8    -1     
=========================================
- Hits             9         8    -1     

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

@stdavis stdavis enabled auto-merge (rebase) January 23, 2025 23:23
@stdavis stdavis requested a review from Copilot January 23, 2025 23:23
@stdavis stdavis merged commit 21e2fcc into main Jan 23, 2025
4 checks passed
@stdavis stdavis deleted the standardize branch January 23, 2025 23:23
Copy link

@Copilot Copilot AI left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Copilot reviewed 3 out of 4 changed files in this pull request and generated 1 comment.

Files not reviewed (1)
  • .vscode/settings.json: Language not supported
Comments suppressed due to low confidence (1)

src/projectname/version.py:1

  • [nitpick] The updated docstring is less informative. Consider updating it to include the requirement to have only a single line for the version.
"""A single source of truth for the version in a programmatically-accessible variable."""

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.

2 participants