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

chore: misc typing #849

Merged
merged 4 commits into from
Mar 25, 2024
Merged

chore: misc typing #849

merged 4 commits into from
Mar 25, 2024

Conversation

seve
Copy link
Contributor

@seve seve commented Mar 25, 2024

No description provided.

Copy link

codecov bot commented Mar 25, 2024

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 76.57%. Comparing base (188c4de) to head (2d97cab).

Additional details and impacted files
@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main     #849   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   76.57%   76.57%           
=======================================
  Files          88       88           
  Lines        6994     6994           
=======================================
  Hits         5356     5356           
  Misses       1638     1638           
Flag Coverage Δ
frontend 76.57% <ø> (ø)
javascript 76.57% <ø> (ø)
smokeTest ∅ <ø> (∅)
unitTest 76.57% <ø> (ø)

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

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

@seve seve merged commit 92e478f into main Mar 25, 2024
6 of 7 checks passed
@seve seve deleted the seve/misc-typing branch March 25, 2024 19:39
@@ -16,7 +16,7 @@
"e2e-stage": "CXG_URL_BASE=https://cellxgene.staging.single-cell.czi.technology playwright test",
"e2e-prod": "CXG_URL_BASE=https://cellxgene.cziscience.com playwright test",
"fmt": "eslint --fix src __tests__",
"lint": "eslint src __tests__ & npm run type-check",
"lint": "eslint src __tests__ && npm run type-check",
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I think this with & only will run both commands in parallel. Is there a reason to make this sequential?

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