-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 197
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Tests: improve coverage of NodeScanner #517
Tests: improve coverage of NodeScanner #517
Conversation
Codecov ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅
❗ Your organization needs to install the Codecov GitHub app to enable full functionality. Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #517 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 68.86% 69.05% +0.19%
==========================================
Files 26 26
Lines 3112 3112
Branches 526 526
==========================================
+ Hits 2143 2149 +6
+ Misses 831 825 -6
Partials 138 138 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Looked at the code on a high level, and it seems to do sensible things. Let's get this merged and take care of any fallout when it occurs (none expected though).
Seems flaky... Maybe I shouldn't have written that no troubles are expected? It failed immediately when testing the merge commit on master. @erlend-aasland could you please investigate? |
Sure; I'll get to it in a day or two. |
|
No description provided.