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

CI: only run cargo hack check on Linux #1442

Merged
merged 1 commit into from Feb 14, 2024

Conversation

pitdicker
Copy link
Collaborator

@pitdicker pitdicker commented Feb 14, 2024

The cargo hack-check runs take ca. 10 minutes longer to run on Windows and MacOS then the other CI jobs.
None of our features interact with our platform integration code, so these CI jobs always succeed if the other jobs do.
Seems removing them is an easy way to cut our CI times to a third.

(Sorry, tiny PR.)

Copy link

codecov bot commented Feb 14, 2024

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Comparison is base (e2e0dfe) 91.86% compared to head (6e31ac9) 91.86%.

Additional details and impacted files
@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main    #1442   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   91.86%   91.86%           
=======================================
  Files          40       40           
  Lines       17471    17471           
=======================================
  Hits        16049    16049           
  Misses       1422     1422           

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

Copy link
Contributor

@djc djc left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Nice!

@pitdicker pitdicker merged commit 60f8b74 into chronotope:main Feb 14, 2024
35 checks passed
@pitdicker pitdicker deleted the feature_check_linux_only branch February 14, 2024 14:05
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.

None yet

2 participants