feat: add an option to exclude packages from freezing #16
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Add a short name for the option while we're at it.
Codecov ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #16 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 90.59% 97.08% +6.49%
==========================================
Files 1 1
Lines 202 206 +4
==========================================
+ Hits 183 200 +17
+ Misses 19 6 -13 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
ajkerrigan
commented
Feb 27, 2024
Confirm that command-level options feed into IcedPoet attributes.
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
It's useful to be able to freeze most dependencies but leave specific packages with deliberately looser/intact version constraints.
Testing from the command level seems necessary (with or without the motivation of coverage failures), but it's definitely more awkward. Tried to cobble together the minimum useful test based on looking at resources like:
That command-level test feels like it could be made clearer/simpler/better, but at this point I'm not sure how 🤔