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

fix: Only check keyHasError if ordering key is non-empty #367

merged 15 commits into from Sep 29, 2020


Copy link

@kamalaboulhosn kamalaboulhosn commented Sep 29, 2020

No description provided.

@kamalaboulhosn kamalaboulhosn requested a review from as a code owner Sep 29, 2020
@google-cla google-cla bot added the cla: yes label Sep 29, 2020
@kamalaboulhosn kamalaboulhosn changed the title fix: Only check keyHasError if ordering keys is non-empty fix: Only check keyHasError if ordering key is non-empty Sep 29, 2020
Copy link

@codecov codecov bot commented Sep 29, 2020

Codecov Report

Merging #367 into master will not change coverage.
The diff coverage is 100.00%.

Impacted file tree graph

@@            Coverage Diff            @@
##             master     #367   +/-   ##
  Coverage     79.20%   79.20%           
- Complexity      319      320    +1     
  Files            21       21           
  Lines          2905     2905           
  Branches        159      159           
  Hits           2301     2301           
  Misses          537      537           
  Partials         67       67           
Impacted Files Coverage Δ Complexity Δ
...ain/java/com/google/cloud/pubsub/v1/ 87.13% <100.00%> (ø) 47.00 <0.00> (+1.00)

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 7cdf8bc...8be37d7. Read the comment docs.

@kamalaboulhosn kamalaboulhosn merged commit 8b2d0b7 into googleapis:master Sep 29, 2020
19 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
cla: yes
None yet

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

2 participants