Skip to content

feat: toml formatting verification in CI #181

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
Jun 3, 2024
Merged

Conversation

dorimedini-starkware
Copy link
Collaborator

@dorimedini-starkware dorimedini-starkware commented Jun 3, 2024

This change is Reviewable

@codecov-commenter
Copy link

codecov-commenter commented Jun 3, 2024

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 63.07%. Comparing base (89b1bca) to head (db2a60c).
Report is 2 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main     #181      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   62.11%   63.07%   +0.96%     
==========================================
  Files          36       36              
  Lines        1668     1717      +49     
  Branches     1668     1717      +49     
==========================================
+ Hits         1036     1083      +47     
- Misses        583      586       +3     
+ Partials       49       48       -1     

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

@dorimedini-starkware dorimedini-starkware force-pushed the dori/taplo branch 4 times, most recently from 7241d7d to 771f27f Compare June 3, 2024 08:02
Signed-off-by: Dori Medini <dori@starkware.co>
Copy link
Contributor

@TzahiTaub TzahiTaub left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Reviewed 1 of 3 files at r1, 4 of 4 files at r2, all commit messages.
Reviewable status: all files reviewed, 1 unresolved discussion (waiting on @dorimedini-starkware)


.github/workflows/ci.yml line 72 at r2 (raw file):

          crate: taplo-cli
          version: '0.9.0'
          locked: true

Do the different uses/with ordering compared to clippy (for example) have any meaning?

Code quote:

      - uses: Swatinem/rust-cache@v2
      - uses: baptiste0928/cargo-install@v3
        with:
          crate: taplo-cli
          version: '0.9.0'
          locked: true

Copy link
Collaborator Author

@dorimedini-starkware dorimedini-starkware left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Reviewable status: :shipit: complete! all files reviewed, all discussions resolved (waiting on @dorimedini-starkware)


.github/workflows/ci.yml line 72 at r2 (raw file):

Previously, TzahiTaub (Tzahi) wrote…

Do the different uses/with ordering compared to clippy (for example) have any meaning?

Order matters, but I think the order between Swatinem/rust-cache and baptiste0928/cargo-install doesn't matter.
I am not even sure Swatinem/rust-cache is needed, but in case it caches something I think it doesn't hurt (the phase is really fast).
Also, the order here is the same as clippy, except the dtolnay/rust-toolchain here doesn't need the clippy component

Copy link
Contributor

@TzahiTaub TzahiTaub left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

:lgtm:

Reviewable status: :shipit: complete! all files reviewed, all discussions resolved (waiting on @dorimedini-starkware)

@dorimedini-starkware dorimedini-starkware added this pull request to the merge queue Jun 3, 2024
Merged via the queue into main with commit 198f69e Jun 3, 2024
12 checks passed
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