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

fix: use correct lint config for individual files #167

Merged
merged 4 commits into from Jun 7, 2018

Conversation

ofrobots
Copy link
Contributor

@ofrobots ofrobots commented Jun 4, 2018

When invoked with a list of files, linter configuration pertaining to
those files should be preferred rather than the gts default config.

When invoked with a list of files, linter configuration pertaining to
those files should be preferred rather than the gts default config.
@codecov-io
Copy link

codecov-io commented Jun 4, 2018

Codecov Report

Merging #167 into master will increase coverage by 0.23%.
The diff coverage is 100%.

Impacted file tree graph

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master     #167      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   96.78%   97.01%   +0.23%     
==========================================
  Files          10       10              
  Lines         342      369      +27     
  Branches       24       27       +3     
==========================================
+ Hits          331      358      +27     
  Misses         11       11
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
test/test-lint.ts 100% <100%> (ø) ⬆️
src/lint.ts 100% <100%> (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 9689211...c52f203. Read the comment docs.

@ofrobots ofrobots merged commit 09ca073 into google:master Jun 7, 2018
@ofrobots ofrobots deleted the lint-resolve-vs-join branch June 7, 2018 01:04
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

4 participants