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鈥檒l occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[Snyk] Upgrade async-lock from 1.2.2 to 1.2.4 #85

Closed

Conversation

snyk-bot
Copy link
Contributor

Snyk has created this PR to upgrade async-lock from 1.2.2 to 1.2.4.

merge advice

鉁╓hat is Merge Advice? We check thousands of dependency upgrade pull requests and CI tests every day to see which upgrades were successfully merged. After crunching this data, we give a recommendation on how safe we think the change is for you to merge without causing issues. Learn more, and share your feedback to help improve this feature. 馃檹
鈩癸笍 Keep your dependencies up-to-date. This makes it easier to fix existing vulnerabilities and to more quickly identify and fix newly disclosed vulnerabilities when they affect your project.
  • The recommended version is 2 versions ahead of your current version.
  • The recommended version was released a day ago, on 2020-05-12.
Release notes
Package name: async-lock from async-lock GitHub release notes
Commit messages
Package name: async-lock

Compare


Note: You are seeing this because you or someone else with access to this repository has authorized Snyk to open upgrade PRs.

For more information:

馃 View latest project report

馃洜 Adjust upgrade PR settings

馃敃 Ignore this dependency or unsubscribe from future upgrade PRs

@coveralls
Copy link

Coverage Status

Coverage remained the same at 97.839% when pulling f8953c4 on snyk-upgrade-f3bc134f8e02544ff440e6e1b8408ce0 into 48850db on master.

@localnerve localnerve deleted the snyk-upgrade-f3bc134f8e02544ff440e6e1b8408ce0 branch May 24, 2020 16:33
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