-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 19
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
detect if API breaks on PR #727
base: main
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
Codecov ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #727 +/- ##
=======================================
Coverage 92.17% 92.17%
=======================================
Files 134 134
Lines 9790 9790
=======================================
Hits 9024 9024
Misses 766 766
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more. ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
See https://mkdocstrings.github.io/griffe/checking/#detected-breakages We get errors, but that is because we are breaking things, after the 1.0 tag, we can use this check to make sure we update the change log with breakage. For example: |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This is really cool @mikemhenry - I personally like it.
python-version: "3.12" | ||
|
||
- name: Check for API breaks | ||
continue-on-error: true |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I can't remember what side effect this has anymore - does it mean that we get a green tick even if it fails? If so, we should make it loud and not a merge requirement imho. That way we can have the red tick and know that it was API breaking?
Developers certificate of origin