-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 547
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
#2498 try different entry points method #2500
Conversation
Codecov ReportBase: 99.72% // Head: 99.72% // No change to project coverage 👍
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## develop #2500 +/- ##
========================================
Coverage 99.72% 99.72%
========================================
Files 268 268
Lines 19285 19285
========================================
Hits 19232 19232
Misses 53 53
Help us with your feedback. Take ten seconds to tell us how you rate us. Have a feature suggestion? Share it here. ☔ View full report at Codecov. |
How are test passing when this doesn’t add entrypoints as a dependency? |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Looks good, thanks!
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Should be added to the CHANGELOG? (given that a user caught this)
@awadell1 I guess it must be included in default python? |
Description
Fixes #2498
See click-contrib/click-plugins#31 (comment)
Type of change
Please add a line in the relevant section of CHANGELOG.md to document the change (include PR #) - note reverse order of PR #s. If necessary, also add to the list of breaking changes.
Key checklist:
$ flake8
$ python run-tests.py --unit
$ cd docs
and then$ make clean; make html
You can run all three at once, using
$ python run-tests.py --quick
.Further checks: