Closed mbafford closed 1 year ago
Merging #109 (7cd93d5) into master (ed6f30e) will decrease coverage by
0.75%
. The diff coverage is75.00%
.:exclamation: Current head 7cd93d5 differs from pull request most recent head 27198ab. Consider uploading reports for the commit 27198ab to get more accurate results
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #109 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 87.84% 87.08% -0.76%
==========================================
Files 4 4
Lines 362 364 +2
Branches 93 94 +1
==========================================
- Hits 318 317 -1
- Misses 21 22 +1
- Partials 23 25 +2
Impacted Files | Coverage Δ | |
---|---|---|
icalevents/icalparser.py | 87.13% <75.00%> (-1.02%) |
:arrow_down: |
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 ed6f30e...27198ab. Read the comment docs.
I merged https://github.com/jazzband/icalevents/pull/97 and incooperated this mr. Thank you for the awesome contribution and good catch!
My company's Exchange server ICS has
EXDATE
entries in this format (multiple excludes on the same line):whereas all existing tests have
EXDATE
on separate lines - e.g. fromrecurring.ics
test:This adds a test for my server's format, as well as fixing the code that does not expect
component['EXDATE']
to be avDDDLists
object.Moving
exceptions = {}
inside the loop brings bringscest.ics
test to returning 116 events, but like with #110 , that test is large - I can't easily tell what the "right" answer is (similar problem looks to have affected #110, #97, and #102).