Skip to content

Test against 0.4.3#1425

Closed
mattwthompson wants to merge 1 commit intoOpenFreeEnergy:mainfrom
mattwthompson:interchange-v0.4.3
Closed

Test against 0.4.3#1425
mattwthompson wants to merge 1 commit intoOpenFreeEnergy:mainfrom
mattwthompson:interchange-v0.4.3

Conversation

@mattwthompson
Copy link
Contributor

ref openforcefield/openff-interchange#1253

Checklist

  • Added a news entry

Developers certificate of origin

@github-actions
Copy link

github-actions bot commented Jul 9, 2025

No API break detected ✅

@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Jul 9, 2025

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 92.24%. Comparing base (04387d7) to head (0716d9a).
⚠️ Report is 109 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #1425      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   95.11%   92.24%   -2.88%     
==========================================
  Files         165      165              
  Lines       12389    12389              
==========================================
- Hits        11784    11428     -356     
- Misses        605      961     +356     
Flag Coverage Δ
fast-tests 92.24% <ø> (?)
slow-tests ?

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ 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.

@mattwthompson
Copy link
Contributor Author

Nothing obviously broken

@IAlibay
Copy link
Member

IAlibay commented Jul 14, 2025

Thanks for testing this @mattwthompson - just a heads up, we don't actually do anything directly with Interchange here (at least for now). So as long as relevant tests pass in openmmforcefields, we're probably fine.

The place where testing might be more useful is in pontibus. There we do use Interchange directly, so that might be a good canary for "will things break", especially after we finish implementing that temporary rbfe protocol.

@mattwthompson
Copy link
Contributor Author

Thanks for the added context - this was definitely me just plucking one downstream package to make sure nothing major broke. Your suggestions sound good for other places to check and I'll do those in the future

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