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

Add missing output titles #69

Merged

Conversation

mrginglymus
Copy link
Contributor

No description provided.

@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Jan 8, 2021

Codecov Report

Merging #69 (133dbdd) into master (c427313) will increase coverage by 0.06%.
The diff coverage is 100.00%.

Impacted file tree graph

@@             Coverage Diff              @@
##             master      #69      +/-   ##
============================================
+ Coverage     86.51%   86.58%   +0.06%     
  Complexity       78       78              
============================================
  Files            14       14              
  Lines           408      410       +2     
  Branches         17       17              
============================================
+ Hits            353      355       +2     
  Misses           49       49              
  Partials          6        6              
Impacted Files Coverage Δ Complexity Δ
...o/jenkins/plugins/checks/steps/WithChecksStep.java 76.47% <100.00%> (+0.56%) 2.00 <0.00> (ø)

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update c427313...133dbdd. Read the comment docs.

@timja timja added the enhancement New feature or request label Jan 8, 2021
@timja
Copy link
Member

timja commented Jan 8, 2021

Do you have a screenshot? showing what it looks like now?

@mrginglymus
Copy link
Contributor Author

mrginglymus commented Jan 9, 2021

Right now it explodes because https://github.com/jenkinsci/github-checks-plugin/blob/c53b65d3ecc81bf2cc9648c813ccbb59ade2647b/src/main/java/io/jenkins/plugins/checks/github/GitHubChecksDetails.java#L172

I’m not sure if I’d classify this as a bug (as the api doesn’t currently rehire the title), but perhaps we need to test withChecks (and job checks) in this repo with GitHub checks publisher too, as it’s the de facto reference implementation.

@XiongKezhi XiongKezhi self-requested a review January 10, 2021 06:35
@XiongKezhi XiongKezhi merged commit b1dde5e into jenkinsci:master Jan 10, 2021
@mrginglymus mrginglymus deleted the with-checks-failure-handler branch January 21, 2021 22:04
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or request
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants