Skip to content

lookup: skip moment#777

Merged
MylesBorins merged 1 commit intonodejs:masterfrom
BethGriggs:mark-flakys
Jan 3, 2020
Merged

lookup: skip moment#777
MylesBorins merged 1 commit intonodejs:masterfrom
BethGriggs:mark-flakys

Conversation

@BethGriggs
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Moment is currently failing on all platforms - moment/moment#5334

Checklist
  • npm test passes
  • contribution guidelines followed
    here

@BethGriggs
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

@BethGriggs
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

BethGriggs commented Jan 3, 2020

If I mark something skip=true in CITGM, do I need to wait for a new release of citgm for that to be taken into account in the citgm CI runs?

@codecov-io
Copy link
Copy Markdown

codecov-io commented Jan 3, 2020

Codecov Report

Merging #777 into master will not change coverage.
The diff coverage is n/a.

Impacted file tree graph

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##           master     #777   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   95.49%   95.49%           
=======================================
  Files          27       27           
  Lines         888      888           
=======================================
  Hits          848      848           
  Misses         40       40

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 37d0b2f...8c28803. Read the comment docs.

@richardlau
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

If I mark something skip=true in CITGM, do I need to wait for a new release of citgm for that to be taken into account in the citgm CI runs?

Yes. I can’t do that right now until Sunday at the earliest but maybe someone else could.

@sam-github
Copy link
Copy Markdown

@BethGriggs maybe use the CITGM job parameter?

what citgm should npm install: "npm install -g $CITGM" (can be replaced with any npm compatible path)

npm install -g nodejs/citgm should install citgm from master, from github.com, so you might be able to use that to run a citgm with your latest lookup.json without waiting for an npm publish.

@MylesBorins
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Sam's suggestion is a good one. A couple of thoughts

  • There is not need for review lookup changes in our current governance
  • numbers are cheap... it is quite easy to quickly publish after landing a change to the lookup (this is how I've done it)
  • I opened an issue for other to get added to publish rights

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@MylesBorins MylesBorins left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM

@MylesBorins MylesBorins merged commit 4a31d21 into nodejs:master Jan 3, 2020
@MylesBorins
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

also fwiw I've landed this and published a new version of citgm

@codecov-commenter
Copy link
Copy Markdown

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 95.49%. Comparing base (37d0b2f) to head (8c28803).

Additional details and impacted files
@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##           master     #777   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   95.49%   95.49%           
=======================================
  Files          27       27           
  Lines         888      888           
=======================================
  Hits          848      848           
  Misses         40       40           

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

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
  • ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
  • 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

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.

7 participants