Closed ronnetzer closed 2 years ago
CI ran the following commands for commit c3c0bb01d43bb9daa4c3123925269df2dd4800eb. Click to see the status, the terminal output, and the build insights.
📂 See all runs for this branch
Sent with 💌 from NxCloud.
Merging #42 (c3c0bb0) into main (9596455) will increase coverage by
0.30%
. The diff coverage isn/a
.
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #42 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 88.12% 88.42% +0.30%
==========================================
Files 15 15
Lines 362 363 +1
Branches 50 51 +1
==========================================
+ Hits 319 321 +2
Misses 39 39
+ Partials 4 3 -1
Flag | Coverage Δ | |
---|---|---|
nx-affected-matrix | 95.91% <ø> (ø) |
|
nx-distributed-task | 100.00% <ø> (ø) |
|
utils | 82.14% <ø> (+0.52%) |
:arrow_up: |
Impacted Files | Coverage Δ | |
---|---|---|
packages/utils/src/lib/inputs.ts | 62.50% <0.00%> (+0.68%) |
:arrow_up: |
packages/utils/src/lib/cache.ts | 98.21% <0.00%> (+1.78%) |
:arrow_up: |
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 7c6ef1c...c3c0bb0. Read the comment docs.
PR Checklist
Please check if your PR fulfills the following requirements:
PR Type
What kind of change does this PR introduce?
What is the current behavior?
currently NX is having a new way of invoking custom hashers (its still experimental). the action only supports the new one which breaks the action on older nx workspaces
Issue Number: N/A
What is the new behavior?
supporting both ways by checking the amount of arguments needed for the customHasher function
Does this PR introduce a breaking change?