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

[rfw] Temporarily lower test coverage requirements to allow flutter roll #2493

Merged
merged 5 commits into from
Aug 24, 2022

Conversation

tarrinneal
Copy link
Contributor

Temporarily lower rfw test coverage requirements to allow flutter roll

List which issues are fixed by this PR. You must list at least one issue.
Flutter roll failure

If you had to change anything in the flutter/tests repo, include a link to the migration guide as per the breaking change policy.

Pre-launch Checklist

  • I read the Contributor Guide and followed the process outlined there for submitting PRs.
  • I read the Tree Hygiene wiki page, which explains my responsibilities.
  • I read and followed the relevant style guides and ran the auto-formatter. (Unlike the flutter/flutter repo, the flutter/packages repo does use dart format.)
  • I signed the CLA.
  • The title of the PR starts with the name of the package surrounded by square brackets, e.g. [shared_preferences]
  • I listed at least one issue that this PR fixes in the description above.
  • I updated pubspec.yaml with an appropriate new version according to the pub versioning philosophy, or this PR is exempt from version changes.
  • I updated CHANGELOG.md to add a description of the change, following repository CHANGELOG style.
  • I updated/added relevant documentation (doc comments with ///).
  • I added new tests to check the change I am making, or this PR is test-exempt.
  • All existing and new tests are passing.

If you need help, consider asking for advice on the #hackers-new channel on Discord.

@flutter-dashboard
Copy link

It looks like this pull request may not have tests. Please make sure to add tests before merging. If you need an exemption to this rule, contact Hixie on the #hackers channel in Chat (don't just cc him here, he won't see it! He's on Discord!).

If you are not sure if you need tests, consider this rule of thumb: the purpose of a test is to make sure someone doesn't accidentally revert the fix. Ask yourself, is there anything in your PR that you feel it is important we not accidentally revert back to how it was before your fix?

Reviewers: Read the Tree Hygiene page and make sure this patch meets those guidelines before LGTMing.

packages/rfw/pubspec.yaml Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@tarrinneal tarrinneal added override: no versioning needed Override the check requiring version bumps for most changes and removed needs tests labels Aug 23, 2022
Copy link
Contributor

@stuartmorgan stuartmorgan left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM

@tarrinneal tarrinneal merged commit 5e5ac32 into flutter:main Aug 24, 2022
@tarrinneal tarrinneal deleted the fixFlutterRoll branch September 25, 2022 03:18
@Hixie Hixie mentioned this pull request Jun 30, 2023
11 tasks
auto-submit bot pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Jul 13, 2023
Fixes flutter/flutter#106205 by regenerating goldens.

This is a follow-up to #2493.

This won't work until flutter/flutter#129851 lands and rolls into this repo.

I ran a script that I use to remove trailing spaces in the wrong directory and it cleaned up a couple of other files. The changes seem harmless so I left them in.

As this is only adding tests, this does not require a new version.

Adding tests found two bugs; one, there was a dead code branch in the tokenizer (code is now removed), and two, it found a bug in the framework (see link to PR above).
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
override: no versioning needed Override the check requiring version bumps for most changes p: rfw Remote Flutter Widgets
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants