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

Upgrade jgit to 6.9.0.202403050737-r #509

Merged
merged 2 commits into from Apr 7, 2024
Merged

Conversation

wetneb
Copy link
Contributor

@wetneb wetneb commented Apr 6, 2024

Fixes #487.

@codecov-commenter
Copy link

codecov-commenter commented Apr 6, 2024

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 82.28%. Comparing base (ba76361) to head (ccb6378).
Report is 5 commits behind head on master.

Additional details and impacted files
@@             Coverage Diff              @@
##             master     #509      +/-   ##
============================================
- Coverage     82.70%   82.28%   -0.42%     
  Complexity      363      363              
============================================
  Files            43       43              
  Lines          1769     1722      -47     
  Branches        303      304       +1     
============================================
- Hits           1463     1417      -46     
+ Misses          180      179       -1     
  Partials        126      126              

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

Copy link
Collaborator

@slarse slarse left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Hi @wetneb,

Ah, I see, so the problem was that JGit added in the base chunk as well (fortunate for your current endeavors!).

I only have a little thing to say about the new unit test :)

@@ -0,0 +1,27 @@
package se.kth.spork;
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I'm somewhat opposed to adding new unit-ish tests unless there's strong reason for it (which I don't see, feel free to point out something I'm missing).

While this exact scenario isn't tested anywhere, line-based merge conflicts are tested in this scenario test.

If you feel something is missing, consider either adding it to the existing test scenario I linked or creating a new scenario. Or justify why this should be unit tested.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Sure, I can remove it… for me it's a habit more than anything else, as a way to document the behaviour of individual components, but for a tool like spork I can see it makes sense to rely on integration tests instead.

Copy link
Collaborator

@slarse slarse left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Thanks @wetneb!

@slarse slarse merged commit 00a8ec7 into ASSERT-KTH:master Apr 7, 2024
4 checks passed
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.

Update jgit
3 participants