Skip to content
This repository was archived by the owner on May 1, 2025. It is now read-only.

Conversation

@jmeridth
Copy link
Member

@jmeridth jmeridth commented May 8, 2024

Pull Request

Proposed Changes

We do not have any custom CodeQL jobs, so we are going back to the default CodeQL setup.

New default CodeQL setup is already running successfully

Readiness Checklist

Author/Contributor

  • If documentation is needed for this change, has that been included in this pull request
  • run make lint and fix any issues that you have introduced
  • run make test and ensure you have test coverage for the lines you are introducing

Reviewer

  • Label as either bug, documentation, enhancement, infrastructure, maintenance or breaking

We do not have any custom CodeQL jobs, so we are going back to the default CodeQL setup.

[New default CodeQL setup is already running successfully](https://github.com/github/automatic-contrib-prs/actions/workflows/github-code-scanning/codeql)
@jmeridth jmeridth self-assigned this May 8, 2024
@jmeridth jmeridth requested review from lindluni and zkoppert as code owners May 8, 2024 17:58
@jmeridth jmeridth merged commit 93551b8 into main May 8, 2024
@jmeridth jmeridth deleted the jm-remove-custom-codeql-action branch May 8, 2024 18:01
jmeridth added a commit that referenced this pull request May 28, 2024
- [x] auto-labeler action
- [x] release action
- [x] fix codeql bade in README (after we removed custom workflow in #70)

Signed-off-by: jmeridth <jmeridth@gmail.com>
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants