Always send 'checks' field when creating branch protection #2468
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thank you, @luisdavim .
Could you please add a unit test demonstrating that this field is indeed sent when empty as a means of documenting that we explicitly wish to send it in all cases?
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #2468 +/- ##
=======================================
Coverage 98.03% 98.03%
=======================================
Files 122 122
Lines 10695 10695
=======================================
Hits 10485 10485
Misses 144 144
Partials 66 66
Help us with your feedback. Take ten seconds to tell us how you rate us. Have a feature suggestion? Share it here. |
…anches to be up to date before merging and no checks Signed-off-by: Luis Davim <luis.davim@sendoso.com>
|
@gmlewis I've added a new test case for this scenario, where we set strict branch protection checks with an empty set of checks. |
…ction checks Signed-off-by: Luis Davim <luis.davim@sendoso.com>
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thank you, @luisdavim !
LGTM.
Awaiting second LGTM+Approval from any other contributor to this repo before merging.
|
Thank you, @raynigon ! |
gmlewis
changed the title
Fixes #2467