Closed gzm0 closed 1 month ago
All tests were cache hits
201 tests (100.0%) were fully cached saving 38s.
All tests were cache hits
5 tests (100.0%) were fully cached saving 1s.
All tests were cache hits
2 tests (100.0%) were fully cached saving 236ms.
All tests were cache hits
1 test (100.0%) was fully cached saving 7s.
All tests were cache hits
3 tests (100.0%) were fully cached saving 839ms.
All tests were cache hits
3 tests (100.0%) were fully cached saving 745ms.
All tests were cache hits
1 test (100.0%) was fully cached saving 27ms.
All tests were cache hits
1 test (100.0%) was fully cached saving 27ms.
All tests were cache hits
2 tests (100.0%) were fully cached saving 296ms.
All tests were cache hits
1 test (100.0%) was fully cached saving 112ms.
All tests were cache hits
3 tests (100.0%) were fully cached saving 716ms.
All tests were cache hits
1 test (100.0%) was fully cached saving 192ms.
All tests were cache hits
1 test (100.0%) was fully cached saving 81ms.
All tests were cache hits
1 test (100.0%) was fully cached saving 81ms.
All tests were cache hits
1 test (100.0%) was fully cached saving 713ms.
All tests were cache hits
40 tests (100.0%) were fully cached saving 3s.
All tests were cache hits
10 tests (100.0%) were fully cached saving 2s.
All tests were cache hits
10 tests (100.0%) were fully cached saving 2s.
All tests were cache hits
2 tests (100.0%) were fully cached saving 233ms.
All tests were cache hits
2 tests (100.0%) were fully cached saving 153ms.
All tests were cache hits
1 test (100.0%) was fully cached saving 171ms.
@gzm0 I think this was all correctly merged in the other PR?
Yep, looks like it (seems it got squashed, but the changes are there).
This is in preparation for #1907: As dependency resolution gets more complex, we should test it.
Note: No updates to to bzl_library targets, because it seems
extensions.bzl
isn't in a bzl_library.Changes are visible to end-users: no
Test plan