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

[stable10] Put attributes into generated XML #29303

Merged

Conversation

DeepDiver1975
Copy link
Member

backport of #29230 to stable10

@DeepDiver1975 DeepDiver1975 added this to the development milestone Oct 19, 2017
@DeepDiver1975 DeepDiver1975 self-assigned this Oct 19, 2017
@phil-davis phil-davis changed the title [stable10] Merge pull request #29230 from owncloud/issue-29229 [stable10] Put attributes into generated XML Oct 20, 2017
@phil-davis phil-davis force-pushed the stable10-5ed2e0b7e1508d7ac5e967551b6a66da67723cca branch from 5c9ce83 to ece616a Compare October 20, 2017 01:19
@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Oct 20, 2017

Codecov Report

Merging #29303 into stable10 will decrease coverage by <.01%.
The diff coverage is 0%.

Impacted file tree graph

@@              Coverage Diff               @@
##             stable10   #29303      +/-   ##
==============================================
- Coverage        58.4%    58.4%   -0.01%     
- Complexity      17693    17695       +2     
==============================================
  Files            1059     1059              
  Lines           59341    59344       +3     
==============================================
  Hits            34657    34657              
- Misses          24684    24687       +3
Impacted Files Coverage Δ Complexity Δ
lib/private/legacy/api.php 41.88% <0%> (-0.55%) 80 <0> (+2)

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 ef290c2...ece616a. Read the comment docs.

@phil-davis
Copy link
Contributor

A Jenkins restart overnight caused Jenkins to fail here (and on many other PRs) so I rebased this to trigger all CI again.
codecov fails. What is the policy with this?

  1. for backports - if the code in master was accepted and merged, then it is by definition acceptable as long as the backport includes the same code changes (and tests if any)? If so, then is there any point giving a codecov fail on backports? or any point running codecov on backports?

  2. for changes in master - if someone fixes some little bug, then they are responsible to write tests to cover the new/changed code fixing the bug, but if there are no tests existing for the area of code they changed, are they now responsible to create a (new) set of unit tests for the class(es) that they were unlucky enough to have touched?

@phil-davis phil-davis merged commit a579d66 into stable10 Oct 20, 2017
@phil-davis phil-davis deleted the stable10-5ed2e0b7e1508d7ac5e967551b6a66da67723cca branch October 20, 2017 04:38
@lock
Copy link

lock bot commented Aug 2, 2019

This thread has been automatically locked since there has not been any recent activity after it was closed. Please open a new issue for related bugs.

@lock lock bot locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators Aug 2, 2019
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants