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

Bring coverage back to 100% #2174

merged 1 commit into from Mar 10, 2021


Copy link

The real reason for this pull request is that we forgot to mark our Rlock as not covered, but I also used this opportunity to switch to a different .coveragerc string.

Indeed, it's true that threading support is "platform-specific" since it's optional in Python 3.6, but since it's always available in Python 3.7 (, using "Python 3.6" will remind us to remove the shim when we drop support for Python 3.6 next year.

Copy link

codecov bot commented Mar 10, 2021

Codecov Report

Merging #2174 (676f79e) into main (6d799ce) will increase coverage by 0.13%.
The diff coverage is n/a.

Impacted file tree graph

@@             Coverage Diff             @@
##             main     #2174      +/-   ##
+ Coverage   99.86%   100.00%   +0.13%     
  Files          26        25       -1     
  Lines        2256      2253       -3     
  Hits         2253      2253              
+ Misses          3         0       -3     
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
src/urllib3/ 100.00% <ø> (ø)

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 6d799ce...676f79e. Read the comment docs.

Copy link

@sethmlarson sethmlarson left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM! Didn't know Python 3.7 made the module non-optional, TIL :)

@sethmlarson sethmlarson merged commit e0d3b95 into urllib3:main Mar 10, 2021
@pquentin pquentin deleted the rlock-coverage branch March 11, 2021 06:25
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
None yet
None yet

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

2 participants