Skip to content
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

🐛 Intitial values for stakeholders #1389

Merged

Conversation

ibolton336
Copy link
Member

-Add stakeholders to payload for assessment
-Load stakeholders from assessment when retaking

@ibolton336 ibolton336 force-pushed the load-stakeholders-into-assessment-wizard branch from 6dbb62d to 637e278 Compare September 21, 2023 20:57
@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Sep 21, 2023

Codecov Report

Patch and project coverage have no change.

Comparison is base (640b187) 41.34% compared to head (573276a) 41.34%.
Report is 1 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files
@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main    #1389   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   41.34%   41.34%           
=======================================
  Files         138      138           
  Lines        4334     4334           
  Branches     1039     1039           
=======================================
  Hits         1792     1792           
  Misses       2454     2454           
  Partials       88       88           
Flag Coverage Δ
client 41.34% <ø> (ø)
server ∅ <ø> (∅)

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

Files Changed Coverage Δ
client/src/app/api/models.ts 100.00% <ø> (ø)

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

Copy link
Member

@sjd78 sjd78 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM

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