Skip to content

Conversation

RussellJQA
Copy link
Contributor

Updated README.rst and axe_selenium_python/package-lock.json from axe-core 3.1.1 to 3.1.2, using "integrity" value copied from https://github.com/pa11y/pa11y-runner-axe/blob/master/package-lock.json

I copied https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/axe-core/3.1.2/axe.min.js to my local axe-selenium-python\axe_selenium_python\node_modules\axe-core\min.js.

And I tested with tox, but using just Python 3.7 (what I have installed) rather than both Python 2.7 and Python 3.6, by making a minor change to my local tox.ini file:
@@ -1,7 +1,7 @@
[tox]
-envlist = py27, py36, flake8
+envlist = py37, flake8

The axe tests passed, but there were some complaints from flake8:
c:\projects\python\selenium\axe-selenium-python.tox\flake8\lib\site-packages\pycodestyle.py:113: FutureWarning: Possible nested set at position 1
EXTRANEOUS_WHITESPACE_REGEX = re.compile(r'[[({] | []}),;:]')
.\setup.py:3:1: I001 isort found an import in the wrong position
.\setup.py:5:1: I003 isort expected 1 blank line in imports, found 0
...

Most of them seem similar to closed issue gforcada/flake8-isort#65, which I don't understand since I'm running the latest version of flake8.
But I don't think that's related to my changes.
I've attached a copy of the tox output.
tox.log

@coveralls
Copy link

Pull Request Test Coverage Report for Build 417

  • 0 of 0 changed or added relevant lines in 0 files are covered.
  • No unchanged relevant lines lost coverage.
  • Overall coverage remained the same at ?%

Totals Coverage Status
Change from base Build 416: 0.0%
Covered Lines:
Relevant Lines: 0

💛 - Coveralls

1 similar comment
@coveralls
Copy link

coveralls commented Dec 4, 2018

Pull Request Test Coverage Report for Build 417

  • 0 of 0 changed or added relevant lines in 0 files are covered.
  • No unchanged relevant lines lost coverage.
  • Overall coverage remained the same at ?%

Totals Coverage Status
Change from base Build 416: 0.0%
Covered Lines:
Relevant Lines: 0

💛 - Coveralls

@RussellJQA
Copy link
Contributor Author

I'm not familiar with Coverall coverage reports. Are the 2 reports basically just saying that the amount of code covered by the tests is unchanged by this pull request?

@stephendonner
Copy link
Contributor

@RussellJQA yep

@m8ttyB
Copy link

m8ttyB commented Dec 5, 2018

Thank you @RussellJQA

@m8ttyB m8ttyB merged commit 0f8fcea into django-commons:master Dec 5, 2018
@RussellJQA
Copy link
Contributor Author

You're welcome @m8ttyB

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.

4 participants