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

Remove last remaining traces of modelMetricsNamespace flag #2438

Merged

Conversation

alexcreasy
Copy link
Contributor

Description

Removes a few orphaned references to the removed modelMetricsNamespace flag.

How Has This Been Tested?

Test Impact

Request review criteria:

Self checklist (all need to be checked):

  • The developer has manually tested the changes and verified that the changes work
  • Commits have been squashed into descriptive, self-contained units of work (e.g. 'WIP' and 'Implements feedback' style messages have been removed)
  • Testing instructions have been added in the PR body (for PRs involving changes that are not immediately obvious).
  • The developer has added tests or explained why testing cannot be added (unit tests & storybook for related changes)

If you have UI changes:

  • Included any necessary screenshots or gifs if it was a UI change.
  • Included tags to the UX team if it was a UI/UX change (find relevant UX in the SMEs section).

After the PR is posted & before it merges:

  • The developer has tested their solution on a cluster by using the image produced by the PR to main

@andrewballantyne
Copy link
Member

Oh, you broke tests... no approval for you 🙂

@lucferbux
Copy link
Contributor

@alexcreasy should we merge this? it's been open for a couple of months

@andrewballantyne
Copy link
Member

/retest

@andrewballantyne
Copy link
Member

Okay, GitHub allowed a rebase -- the test info was lost and seemed to not want me to retest it -- so I figured this way we can try to merge this if the tests pass.

Copy link

codecov bot commented May 13, 2024

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 78.11%. Comparing base (95611b7) to head (dd0dca3).

❗ Current head dd0dca3 differs from pull request most recent head 0cd4f81. Consider uploading reports for the commit 0cd4f81 to get more accurate results

Additional details and impacted files

Impacted file tree graph

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #2438      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   78.14%   78.11%   -0.04%     
==========================================
  Files        1076     1076              
  Lines       22629    22615      -14     
  Branches     5722     5718       -4     
==========================================
- Hits        17684    17665      -19     
- Misses       4945     4950       +5     
Files Coverage Δ
frontend/src/concepts/areas/types.ts 100.00% <ø> (ø)

... and 12 files with indirect coverage changes


Continue to review full report in Codecov by Sentry.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 95611b7...0cd4f81. Read the comment docs.

Copy link
Member

@andrewballantyne andrewballantyne left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Seems to not be on Alex's radar -- going to merge as-is, it's minor cleanup.

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the lgtm label May 15, 2024
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented May 15, 2024

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: andrewballantyne

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

The pull request process is described here

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

@openshift-merge-bot openshift-merge-bot bot merged commit 62f93c0 into opendatahub-io:main May 15, 2024
6 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants