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

An in-range update of codacy-coverage is breaking the build 🚨 #32

Open
greenkeeper bot opened this issue Sep 7, 2017 · 4 comments
Open

An in-range update of codacy-coverage is breaking the build 🚨 #32

greenkeeper bot opened this issue Sep 7, 2017 · 4 comments

Comments

@greenkeeper
Copy link

greenkeeper bot commented Sep 7, 2017

Version 2.0.3 of codacy-coverage just got published.

Branch Build failing 🚨
Dependency codacy-coverage
Current Version 2.0.2
Type devDependency

This version is covered by your current version range and after updating it in your project the build failed.

As codacy-coverage is “only” a devDependency of this project it might not break production or downstream projects, but “only” your build or test tools – preventing new deploys or publishes.

I recommend you give this issue a high priority. I’m sure you can resolve this 💪

Status Details
  • bitHound - Code No failing files. Details
  • bitHound - Dependencies No failing dependencies. Details
  • coverage/coveralls Coverage pending from Coveralls.io Details
  • continuous-integration/travis-ci/push The Travis CI build could not complete due to an error Details

Commits

The new version differs by 6 commits.

  • e78ef3d Release version 2.0.3
  • 42dee02 Update package locks
  • 41a5e42 Merge pull request #45 from codacy/FixJSCoverageReporting
  • ab4d849 Remove buddy js
  • a3f841a Fixed wrong JS coverage reporting
  • ecc496e One more test for total coverage values

See the full diff

Not sure how things should work exactly?

There is a collection of frequently asked questions and of course you may always ask my humans.


Your Greenkeeper Bot 🌴

@greenkeeper
Copy link
Author

greenkeeper bot commented Sep 7, 2017

After pinning to 2.0.2 your tests are still failing. The reported issue might not affect your project. These imprecisions are caused by inconsistent test results.

@greenkeeper
Copy link
Author

greenkeeper bot commented Mar 1, 2018

Version 2.0.4 just got published.

Your tests are still failing with this version. Compare the changes 🚨

Commits

The new version differs by 20 commits.

  • 778dbe0 Release version 2.0.4
  • 693d8e7 Add account token steps to readme
  • 6b7e13c Merge pull request #49 from autodesk-forks/add-account-api-token-support
  • 992bb79 Merge branch 'master' into add-account-api-token-support
  • 3ae9c8d Merge pull request #47 from bobisjan/exit-with-error
  • 5ee98b8 Set exit code to non-zero value on error
  • 8b768a3 Merge pull request #51 from tonymtz/patch-1
  • 3a0bcd7 Merge branch 'master' into patch-1
  • f4a7f4e Merge pull request #52 from codacy/improve-readme
  • fec8fa6 Improve Readme
  • a06709f Merge pull request #53 from codacy/update-dependencies
  • 546d90b Remove support for old node versions
  • 3229d98 Fix joi version
  • a7646ee Update README.md
  • 824a215 Adding instructions when using Jest

There are 20 commits in total.

See the full diff

@greenkeeper
Copy link
Author

greenkeeper bot commented Mar 1, 2018

Version 2.1.0 just got published.

Your tests are still failing with this version. Compare the changes 🚨

Release Notes Release 2.1.0

Improvements

  • Exit code 1 when coverage fails
  • Allow sending coverage with account/api token
  • Better readme examples
Commits

The new version differs by 1 commits.

See the full diff

@greenkeeper
Copy link
Author

greenkeeper bot commented Mar 20, 2018

Version 2.1.1 just got published.

Your tests are still failing with this version. Compare the changes 🚨

Commits

The new version differs by 4 commits.

  • 93003cf Release version 2.1.1
  • 2d176fd Merge pull request #56 from shaneog/buildkite
  • 42c385d Add Buildkite environment variable for commit ID
  • 4e9dae1 Make token choice more explicit

See the full diff

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

0 participants