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

style: reorder checkstyle in travis #721

Merged
merged 1 commit into from Dec 30, 2016
Merged

Conversation

@jorsol
Copy link
Member

@jorsol jorsol commented Dec 22, 2016

Execute checkstyle first in Travis.

@codecov-io
Copy link

@codecov-io codecov-io commented Dec 22, 2016

Current coverage is 64.24% (diff: 100%)

Merging #721 into master will increase coverage by <.01%

@@             master       #721   diff @@
==========================================
  Files           163        163          
  Lines         15142      15142          
  Methods           0          0          
  Messages          0          0          
  Branches       2987       2987          
==========================================
+ Hits           9727       9728     +1   
  Misses         4182       4182          
+ Partials       1233       1232     -1   

Powered by Codecov. Last update 3bc0951...9f6af1a

@jorsol
Copy link
Member Author

@jorsol jorsol commented Dec 30, 2016

With this merge the checkstyle will execute first on Travis, so there will be not wait for tests on 9.6, 9.5, 8.4, 8.3 and 8.2 to finish.

@davecramer davecramer merged commit ba812fb into pgjdbc:master Dec 30, 2016
2 checks passed
2 checks passed
codecov/project 64.24% (+<.01%) compared to 3bc0951
Details
continuous-integration/travis-ci/pr The Travis CI build passed
Details
@vlsi
Copy link
Member

@vlsi vlsi commented Dec 30, 2016

Just in case: the original intent of placing 9.6, 9.5, and 8.x tests on top was to execute the slowest jobs first, so Travis finishes faster on overall.

@vlsi vlsi added this to the 42.0.0 milestone Dec 30, 2016
@jorsol jorsol deleted the jorsol:checkstyle-travis branch Jan 4, 2017
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Linked issues

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

4 participants