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

[HAC-509] add FE template, turn off Jest cache #1743

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jan 26, 2022

Conversation

BlakeHolifield
Copy link
Contributor

  • Turn off cache for Jest testing (breaks on file permissions currently)
  • Add FE template for bonfire to deploy to eph environments.

@codecov-commenter
Copy link

Codecov Report

Merging #1743 (d4ea114) into master (824d911) will not change coverage.
The diff coverage is n/a.

Impacted file tree graph

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##           master    #1743   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   55.01%   55.01%           
=======================================
  Files         104      104           
  Lines        2534     2534           
  Branches      639      639           
=======================================
  Hits         1394     1394           
  Misses        972      972           
  Partials      168      168           

@karelhala karelhala merged commit 96586f4 into RedHatInsights:master Jan 26, 2022
@@ -26,7 +26,7 @@
"fixjs": "eslint src --fix",
"lint": "npm-run-all lint:*",
"lint:js": "eslint src",
"test": "jest --forceExit --detectOpenHandles",
"test": "jest --forceExit --detectOpenHandles --no-cache",
Copy link
Contributor

@Hyperkid123 Hyperkid123 Jan 27, 2022

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@BlakeHolifield Can we create a new command just for the CI? This will significantly increase the duration of the test during local development.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Good point, created new issue for it - #1745

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.

4 participants