Closed abhishalya closed 4 years ago
Merging #140 into master will increase coverage by
0.53%
. The diff coverage is100%
.
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #140 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 82.74% 83.27% +0.53%
==========================================
Files 20 20
Lines 1153 1160 +7
==========================================
+ Hits 954 966 +12
+ Misses 179 174 -5
Partials 20 20
Impacted Files | Coverage Δ | |
---|---|---|
htmltest/check-link.go | 97.75% <100%> (+0.02%) |
:arrow_up: |
htmltest/check-generic.go | 82.5% <100%> (+1.41%) |
:arrow_up: |
htmltest/options.go | 90.41% <100%> (+0.13%) |
:arrow_up: |
htmltest/util.go | 55.55% <0%> (+13.88%) |
: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 57fe7e6...3ff9286. Read the comment docs.
@abhishalya Saw your issue this morning. We've this exact problem on a site I help maintain, :+1: on the feature from me!
I can see this is marked as WIP but thought I'd mention:
AllowExternalLinksToFail
, we've no other options with the prefix "Allow". "Ignore" is quite prevalent but not sure if this feels right. If the other usages of "Ignore" imply demoting errors to warnings this fits, elsewise "Allow" may want adding for this meaning. I've a feeling the "Ignore" prefix has both "ignore completly" and "demote to warning" implementations, would be worth clearing these up in future.@wjdp I agree. How about IgnoreExternalBrokenLinks
?
@wjdp I've added the tests, can you have a look again :)
@wjdp Any update on this one?
Sorry about delay on this!
No problem, thanks for the merge :)
Do let me know if it is useful, we particularly required this while checking links for julialang.org site which has a large number of links.
I'll add tests and docs soon, if this idea looks good enough.
Closes https://github.com/wjdp/htmltest/issues/139
cc @wjdp