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 ruby25 to TravisCI testing #488

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from
Closed

Conversation

blkperl
Copy link
Contributor

@blkperl blkperl commented Sep 15, 2018

Goal

Testing bugsnag against Ruby 2.5

Changeset

Tests

Discussion

Alternative Approaches

Outstanding Questions

Linked issues

Review

For the submitter, initial self-review:

  • Commented on code changes inline explain the reasoning behind the approach
  • Reviewed the test cases added for completeness and possible points for discussion
  • A changelog entry was added for the goal of this pull request
  • Check the scope of the changeset - is everything in the diff required for the pull request?
  • This pull request is ready for:
    • Initial review of the intended approach, not yet feature complete
    • Structural review of the classes, functions, and properties modified
    • Final review

For the pull request reviewer(s), this changeset has been reviewed for:

  • Consistency across platforms for structures or concepts added or modified
  • Consistency between the changeset and the goal stated above
  • Internal consistency with the rest of the library - is there any overlap between existing interfaces and any which have been added?
  • Usage friction - is the proposed change in usage cumbersome or complicated?
  • Performance and complexity - are there any cases of unexpected O(n^3) when iterating, recursing, flat mapping, etc?
  • Concurrency concerns - if components are accessed asynchronously, what issues will arise
  • Thoroughness of added tests and any missing edge cases
  • Idiomatic use of the language

@Cawllec
Copy link
Contributor

Cawllec commented Oct 11, 2018

Hi @blkperl, thanks, this looks good to me. I'm just going to check where our current linting/coverage tools should be, then will get it merged.

@Cawllec
Copy link
Contributor

Cawllec commented Oct 23, 2018

Hi @blkperl, I've made some adjustments and created a new PR here. We'll get that merged with your contribution ASAP. Thanks!

@Cawllec Cawllec closed this Oct 23, 2018
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.

None yet

2 participants