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

Default to styling all supported file formats #965

Merged
merged 8 commits into from
Aug 15, 2022
Merged

Default to styling all supported file formats #965

merged 8 commits into from
Aug 15, 2022

Conversation

IndrajeetPatil
Copy link
Collaborator

Closes #963

@IndrajeetPatil
Copy link
Collaborator Author

@lorenzwalthert All green now.

@lorenzwalthert
Copy link
Collaborator

Thaks for the PR 😄. A few comments:

  • the API file should also be updated. Can you install r-lib/pkgapi and re-run roxygenize?
  • If it is a breaking change (which I am not sure yet), we should probably not merge it into main (but like rc-2.0.0), fix all the other issues in Upcoming breaking changes #769 and then release v2.0.0.

@IndrajeetPatil
Copy link
Collaborator Author

The API file is already updated. precommit caught that.

@IndrajeetPatil
Copy link
Collaborator Author

If it is a breaking change (which I am not sure yet)

Okay, let me know when you come to a decision on this point. It also doesn't feel like a breaking change to me, bur rather a major change.

@IndrajeetPatil
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Hmm, why did the Continuous Benchmarks GHA fail?

@lorenzwalthert
Copy link
Collaborator

Why did {touchstone} fail?

@assignUser can you help here? I think it's related to some non-R code that you contributed that I can't understand. Same problems occured in lorenzwalthert/touchstone#97 (comment).

@assignUser
Copy link

The Commenting step failed because the main touchstone workflow failed and this correctly added a ❌ to the check suite. The actual touchstone run timed out during dependency installation, so probably an issue unrelated to the PR/touchstone.

So overall everything works as intended (except the time out 😁 ), I would try re-running/re-triggering the benchmark

@lorenzwalthert
Copy link
Collaborator

@assignUser oh yes right. Thanks for explaining. So basically every time the first part of the action fails, this same error ocurrs, right? Guess that's just something we have to know if errors occur and then dig deeper... Anyways, I restarted the benchmark. It has an old rspm checkpoint so I am surprised it failed. Let's see what happens...

@codecov-commenter
Copy link

codecov-commenter commented Jul 26, 2022

Codecov Report

Merging #965 (dc3c099) into main (a3b69e4) will not change coverage.
The diff coverage is n/a.

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main     #965   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   90.07%   90.07%           
=======================================
  Files          47       47           
  Lines        2660     2660           
=======================================
  Hits         2396     2396           
  Misses        264      264           
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
R/ui-styling.R 100.00% <ø> (ø)

Help us with your feedback. Take ten seconds to tell us how you rate us. Have a feature suggestion? Share it here.

@github-actions
Copy link
Contributor

github-actions bot commented Aug 6, 2022

This is how benchmark results would change (along with a 95% confidence interval in relative change) if b48b8ff is merged into main:

  •   :ballot_box_with_check:cache_applying: 26.1ms -> 25.9ms [-1.53%, +0.11%]
  •   :ballot_box_with_check:cache_recording: 1.24s -> 1.24s [-0.65%, +1.19%]
  •   :ballot_box_with_check:without_cache: 3.38s -> 3.38s [-0.58%, +0.64%]

Further explanation regarding interpretation and methodology can be found in the documentation.

@lorenzwalthert
Copy link
Collaborator

GitHub Actions now passing, had to update some config, see #969.

@github-actions
Copy link
Contributor

github-actions bot commented Aug 6, 2022

This is how benchmark results would change (along with a 95% confidence interval in relative change) if ff4eca7 is merged into main:

  •   :ballot_box_with_check:cache_applying: 33.6ms -> 33.4ms [-3.18%, +2.02%]
  •   :ballot_box_with_check:cache_recording: 1.4s -> 1.39s [-2.18%, +1.57%]
  •   :ballot_box_with_check:without_cache: 3.73s -> 3.76s [-0.8%, +2.04%]

Further explanation regarding interpretation and methodology can be found in the documentation.

@IndrajeetPatil
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Thanks, @lorenzwalthert! Yes, the builds are indeed passing now.

Btw, having slept a bit more on it, I don't think this would qualify as a breaking change. A breaking change would have been if we had stopped supporting styling a file type. Here, we continue to support everything we were supporting and some more file types.

@lorenzwalthert
Copy link
Collaborator

yeah, you are right. I marked it as user-facing change.

@lorenzwalthert
Copy link
Collaborator

Thanks 🎉

@lorenzwalthert lorenzwalthert merged commit 74c0951 into r-lib:main Aug 15, 2022
@github-actions
Copy link
Contributor

This is how benchmark results would change (along with a 95% confidence interval in relative change) if 66ec3e5 is merged into main:

  •   :ballot_box_with_check:cache_applying: 27.8ms -> 28ms [-0.3%, +1.44%]
  •   :ballot_box_with_check:cache_recording: 1.13s -> 1.13s [-1.11%, +0.1%]
  •   :ballot_box_with_check:without_cache: 3.01s -> 3s [-0.63%, +0.57%]

Further explanation regarding interpretation and methodology can be found in the documentation.

@krlmlr krlmlr mentioned this pull request Aug 21, 2022
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.

Default to styling all supported file types in style_dir() and style_pkg()?
4 participants