Skip to content

Conversation

@antonpirker
Copy link
Contributor

This is the first part of #3482

@antonpirker antonpirker requested a review from a team as a code owner April 1, 2025 10:23
@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Apr 1, 2025

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 79.51%. Comparing base (d0d70a5) to head (ceb1a23).
Report is 8 commits behind head on master.

✅ All tests successful. No failed tests found.

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #4221      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   79.48%   79.51%   +0.03%     
==========================================
  Files         141      141              
  Lines       15809    15810       +1     
  Branches     2703     2703              
==========================================
+ Hits        12565    12572       +7     
+ Misses       2382     2380       -2     
+ Partials      862      858       -4     
Files with missing lines Coverage Δ
sentry_sdk/scope.py 86.16% <100.00%> (+0.01%) ⬆️

... and 4 files with indirect coverage changes

Copy link
Member

@szokeasaurusrex szokeasaurusrex left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

The warning looks good, but it seems like we still use Scope.transaction several places throughout the codebase.

I believe we should first remove those usages, then add the deprecation warning afterwards. Unless, is there some reason why we should instead do this change first?

@antonpirker
Copy link
Contributor Author

Yes you are right. Then it is not worth the effort. Closing this.

@antonpirker antonpirker closed this Apr 3, 2025
@antonpirker antonpirker deleted the antonpirker/deprecate-scope-transaction branch April 22, 2025 09:28
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