Skip to content
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

Tries to make Travis Builds faster #49

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Apr 28, 2017

Conversation

juanpedromoreno
Copy link
Member

@juanpedromoreno juanpedromoreno commented Apr 28, 2017

Please, @fedefernandez could you take a look? Thanks!

@codecov-io
Copy link

codecov-io commented Apr 28, 2017

Codecov Report

Merging #49 into master will increase coverage by 0.94%.
The diff coverage is n/a.

Impacted file tree graph

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master      #49      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   97.16%   98.11%   +0.94%     
==========================================
  Files          10       10              
  Lines         106      106              
==========================================
+ Hits          103      104       +1     
+ Misses          3        2       -1
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
...ortysevendeg/scalacheck/datetime/GenDateTime.scala 100% <0%> (+20%) ⬆️

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 a295021...9410f61. Read the comment docs.

Copy link
Contributor

@fedefernandez fedefernandez left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Great, thanks!

@juanpedromoreno juanpedromoreno merged commit 6adb34e into master Apr 28, 2017
@juanpedromoreno juanpedromoreno deleted the jp-tries-to-make-builds-faster branch April 28, 2017 17:17
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.

3 participants