Skip to content

Omit coverage tests for "_erfa" submodule files - #5422

Merged
astrofrog merged 1 commit into
astropy:masterfrom
MSeifert04:remove_erfa_from_coverage
Oct 30, 2016
Merged

Omit coverage tests for "_erfa" submodule files#5422
astrofrog merged 1 commit into
astropy:masterfrom
MSeifert04:remove_erfa_from_coverage

Conversation

@MSeifert04

@MSeifert04 MSeifert04 commented Oct 19, 2016

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

As mentioned in #5418 (comment) I think we do not need to test _erfa coverage.

@MSeifert04 MSeifert04 changed the title omit coverage for files in _erfa Omit coverage "_erfa" submodule files Oct 19, 2016
@MSeifert04 MSeifert04 changed the title Omit coverage "_erfa" submodule files Omit coverage tests for "_erfa" submodule files Oct 19, 2016
@MSeifert04

MSeifert04 commented Oct 19, 2016

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

+6.3% coverage 😅

@pllim pllim added this to the v1.3.0 milestone Oct 19, 2016
@pllim

pllim commented Oct 19, 2016

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Geez, you are setting a high bar there! 😄

@bsipocz

bsipocz commented Oct 21, 2016

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Wow, you know that when merged this will fail all the coverage tests for the open PRs? :)

(at least that seemed to be a bug in coveralls)

@MSeifert04

MSeifert04 commented Oct 21, 2016

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Wow, you know that when merged this will fail all the coverage tests for the open PRs? :)

That sounds great! 😄

@MSeifert04

MSeifert04 commented Oct 25, 2016

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

@bsipocz Despite my previous comment: Do you know if the bug is still present and if it is - is that a dealbreaker for this PR?

@bsipocz

bsipocz commented Oct 25, 2016

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

@MSeifert04 - Of course not. A PR rebase has always solved this issue. If they still fail after that, then the PR better add some more tests.

@astrofrog
astrofrog merged commit 58730b2 into astropy:master Oct 30, 2016
@astrobot

astrobot commented Oct 30, 2016

Copy link
Copy Markdown

@astrofrog - thanks for merging this! However, I noticed the following issue with this pull request:

  • Changelog entry not present (or pull request number missing) and neither the Affects-dev nor the no-changelog-entry-needed label are set

Would it be possible to fix this? Thanks!

This is an experimental bot being written by @astrofrog - let me know if the message above is incorrect!

@MSeifert04
MSeifert04 deleted the remove_erfa_from_coverage branch October 30, 2016 16:09
@MSeifert04 MSeifert04 mentioned this pull request Jan 25, 2017
Closed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

No reviews

Assignees

No one assigned

Labels

erfa no-changelog-entry-needed testing

Projects

None yet

Milestone

v1.3.0

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants

@MSeifert04 @pllim @bsipocz @astrobot @astrofrog