ref: github webhooks #392
ref: github webhooks #392
Conversation
Codecov Report❌ Patch coverage is
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #392 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 94.22% 94.22% -0.01%
==========================================
Files 1258 1257 -1
Lines 46605 46534 -71
Branches 1491 1491
==========================================
- Hits 43914 43845 -69
+ Misses 2386 2384 -2
Partials 305 305
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more. ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
Codecov Report❌ Patch coverage is
❌ Your patch status has failed because the patch coverage (87.50%) is below the target coverage (90.00%). You can increase the patch coverage or adjust the target coverage. 📢 Thoughts on this report? Let us know! |
CodSpeed Performance ReportMerging #392 will not alter performanceComparing Summary
|
| def __init__(self, *args, **kwargs): | ||
| super().__init__(*args, **kwargs) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is redundant since the super's init function will be called when the subclass doesn't define its own init function
get rid of status_set_pending task since that's only used in a part of the github webhook handler that never gets called so its essentially dead code get rid of unused logs in github webhook handler add a log to check if any users are using the ci skip feature
joseph-sentry
force-pushed
the
joey/ref-gh-webhooks
branch
from
dd46981 to
493c094
Compare
get rid of status_set_pending task since that's only used in a part of the github webhook handler that never gets called so its essentially dead code
get rid of unused logs in github webhook handler
add a log to check if any users are using the ci skip feature