Skip to content

MNT: no need to re-run ruff check after ruff format #958

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jul 29, 2025

Conversation

DimitriPapadopoulos
Copy link
Contributor

Running ruff check then ruff format should always do the right thing.

No need to rerun ruff check specifically for ISC001.

Running `ruff check` then `ruff format` should always do the right thing.

No need to rerun `ruff check` specifically for `ISC001`.
Copy link

codecov bot commented Jul 28, 2025

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 71.54%. Comparing base (7c6e433) to head (d9cfe81).
⚠️ Report is 3 commits behind head on master.

Additional details and impacted files
@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##           master     #958   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   71.54%   71.54%           
=======================================
  Files          89       89           
  Lines        8653     8653           
  Branches     1077     1077           
=======================================
  Hits         6191     6191           
  Misses       2230     2230           
  Partials      232      232           

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
  • ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

@effigies effigies merged commit dc0d174 into nipreps:master Jul 29, 2025
22 checks passed
@DimitriPapadopoulos DimitriPapadopoulos deleted the ISC branch July 29, 2025 13:18
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants