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

Detect risky answers in uplift comments #62

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Oct 26, 2016
Merged

Conversation

La0
Copy link
Contributor

@La0 La0 commented Oct 25, 2016

Hello @marco-c & @calixteman,

In this PR i try to detect risky answers in uplift comments (through the optional parsing function).
As requested by Ritu, typical risky ansswers should be displayed in red (i just add another css class in the output).

Here is the Shipit issue

@marco-c
Copy link
Collaborator

marco-c commented Oct 25, 2016

LGTM, but can you remove the non-ASCII characters () from patchanalysis.py?

This will also be useful for uplift_info, but I will take care of it in the future.

@codecov-io
Copy link

Current coverage is 69.77% (diff: 100%)

Merging #62 into master will increase coverage by 0.18%

@@             master        #62   diff @@
==========================================
  Files            25         25          
  Lines          2812       2829    +17   
  Methods           0          0          
  Messages          0          0          
  Branches        664        669     +5   
==========================================
+ Hits           1957       1974    +17   
- Misses          704        705     +1   
+ Partials        151        150     -1   

Powered by Codecov. Last update a2a9dc7...69fd781

@La0
Copy link
Contributor Author

La0 commented Oct 26, 2016

Good catch, i didn't see that one (it's a copy-pasta).

@marco-c marco-c merged commit b37b2a9 into mozilla:master Oct 26, 2016
@La0 La0 deleted the risky branch October 26, 2016 13:07
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.

3 participants