Tox devdeps_npy2 #271
Merged
Tox devdeps_npy2 #271
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
Codecov ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #271 +/- ##
=======================================
Coverage 80.33% 80.33%
=======================================
Files 5 5
Lines 1017 1017
=======================================
Hits 817 817
Misses 200 200 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
jhunkeler
force-pushed
the
tox-devdeps_npy2_1
branch
from
f393ed8 to
74330bc
Compare
pllim
reviewed
May 15, 2024
This comment was marked as resolved.
This comment was marked as resolved.
Sorry, something went wrong.
* And numpy 1.x is used otherwise. * Credit to @pllim for suggesting to use this approach instead
This was referenced May 15, 2024
mcara
approved these changes
May 15, 2024
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
@mcara Did this get rebased out of #265?