search

infoderm / patients

:face_with_thermometer: Patients meteor app
GNU Affero General Public License v3.0
5 stars 2 forks source link

First implementation of a deployment via `docker compose` #894

Closed make-github-pseudonymous-again closed 4 months ago

make-github-pseudonymous-again commented 4 months ago

Fixes #884 and fixes #895.

codecov[bot] commented 4 months ago

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests :white_check_mark:

Project coverage is 64.46%. Comparing base (9574a14) to head (d0d870e).

Additional details and impacted files ```diff @@ Coverage Diff @@ ## main #894 +/- ## ======================================= Coverage 64.46% 64.46% ======================================= Files 703 703 Lines 9705 9705 Branches 1335 1335 ======================================= Hits 6256 6256 Misses 3004 3004 Partials 445 445 ``` | [Flag](https://app.codecov.io/gh/infoderm/patients/pull/894/flags?src=pr&el=flags&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=infoderm) | Coverage Δ | | |---|---|---| | [test](https://app.codecov.io/gh/infoderm/patients/pull/894/flags?src=pr&el=flag&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=infoderm) | `69.76% <ø> (ø)` | | | [test-app](https://app.codecov.io/gh/infoderm/patients/pull/894/flags?src=pr&el=flag&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=infoderm) | `53.75% <ø> (ø)` | | Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. [Click here](https://docs.codecov.io/docs/carryforward-flags?utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=infoderm#carryforward-flags-in-the-pull-request-comment) to find out more.

:umbrella: View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
:loudspeaker: Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

make-github-pseudonymous-again commented 4 months ago

Waiting on a solution for https://github.com/ArcticLampyrid/action-wait-for-workflow/issues/171. Otherwise, will have to find another solution to wait for image to be ready. #900 is a potential solution, but it cannot be tested in a PR because those type of workflows only run if they are defined on the default branch.

make-github-pseudonymous-again commented 4 months ago

Merging anyway since we can make the PR checks pass by re-running them. Will probably implement #900 just after.