Make RtChecks more safe
#1625
Merged
Make RtChecks more safe
#1625
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
@yegor256 Could you have a look, please? |
|
@yegor256 I'm not sure how to handle that PR, but probably we have to revert Rultor to the earlier version first, then merge that changes and release a new version of |
|
@rultor release, tag is |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
In that PR:
check_runsjson field - if it's empty (or absent) we just return empty list of checks.200 OKresponse in order to print full error massage from HTTP response in case of error.shainstead of namedref- more secure.