Skip to content

fix: actually test fix for local port number in /ip response #213

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

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jun 11, 2025

Conversation

mccutchen
Copy link
Owner

Ugh, forgot I had auto-merge turned on for #212, so it went in before I could push a test.

@mccutchen
Copy link
Owner Author

(Playing with fire, auto-merging again)

@mccutchen mccutchen enabled auto-merge (squash) June 11, 2025 03:44
@mccutchen mccutchen merged commit 3110dab into main Jun 11, 2025
6 checks passed
@mccutchen mccutchen deleted the tests-are-good-to-have-many-people-say-this branch June 11, 2025 03:45
Copy link

codecov bot commented Jun 11, 2025

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 94.51%. Comparing base (e23bc46) to head (55c488b).
Report is 1 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files
@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main     #213   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   94.51%   94.51%           
=======================================
  Files          10       10           
  Lines        2244     2244           
=======================================
  Hits         2121     2121           
  Misses         86       86           
  Partials       37       37           
🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
  • ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

mccutchen added a commit that referenced this pull request Jun 11, 2025
Realized that the test added in #213 had a couple of small-ish issues:
- Missing `t.Parallel()` call, unnecessarily slowing down overall test
  suite
- No need to spin up new ephemeral test server, prefer the existing
  shared one
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.

1 participant