Disallow pushing gems with unresolved deps #5344
Open
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
Codecov ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #5344 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 97.14% 94.24% -2.90%
==========================================
Files 458 458
Lines 9584 9651 +67
==========================================
- Hits 9310 9096 -214
- Misses 274 555 +281 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
Kuanchiliao1
force-pushed
the
disallow-pushing-gems-with-unresolved-deps
branch
3 times, most recently
from
89f95f2 to
8f8f089
Compare
Kuanchiliao1
force-pushed
the
disallow-pushing-gems-with-unresolved-deps
branch
from
8f8f089 to
24f1091
Compare
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Fixes #5055
This verifies that all dependency names exist when pushing a gem. Wasn't super sure on where to put this in the process flow, thought putting it either inside or after
validatemade sense as well.