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

added method-style rule for eslint #2869

Merged

Conversation

rsun19
Copy link
Contributor

@rsun19 rsun19 commented May 31, 2024

Closes: RHOAIENG-4721

Description

Set this eslint rule: "@typescript-eslint/method-signature-style": "error" to have consistency for interface functions. The standard we're trying to achieve is func: (arg: type) => type;

details: https://issues.redhat.com/browse/RHOAIENG-4721

How Has This Been Tested?

npm run test:lint

Request review criteria:

Self checklist (all need to be checked):

  • The developer has manually tested the changes and verified that the changes work
  • Commits have been squashed into descriptive, self-contained units of work (e.g. 'WIP' and 'Implements feedback' style messages have been removed)
  • Testing instructions have been added in the PR body (for PRs involving changes that are not immediately obvious).

After the PR is posted & before it merges:

  • The developer has tested their solution on a cluster by using the image produced by the PR to main

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot requested review from pnaik1 and ppadti May 31, 2024 15:10
@rsun19 rsun19 changed the title added method-style rule for eslint [WIP] added method-style rule for eslint May 31, 2024
@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the do-not-merge/work-in-progress This PR is in WIP state label May 31, 2024
Copy link

codecov bot commented May 31, 2024

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 78.15%. Comparing base (20d32e9) to head (5e0d880).
Report is 2 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

Impacted file tree graph

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main    #2869   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   78.14%   78.15%           
=======================================
  Files        1101     1101           
  Lines       23421    23421           
  Branches     5902     5902           
=======================================
+ Hits        18303    18305    +2     
+ Misses       5118     5116    -2     

see 3 files with indirect coverage changes


Continue to review full report in Codecov by Sentry.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 20d32e9...5e0d880. Read the comment docs.

@rsun19 rsun19 changed the title [WIP] added method-style rule for eslint added method-style rule for eslint Jun 3, 2024
@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot removed the do-not-merge/work-in-progress This PR is in WIP state label Jun 3, 2024
@rsun19 rsun19 closed this Jun 3, 2024
@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot removed the lgtm label Jun 3, 2024
@rsun19 rsun19 reopened this Jun 3, 2024
@christianvogt
Copy link
Contributor

/lgtm
/approve

Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Jun 3, 2024

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: christianvogt, gitdallas

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

The pull request process is described here

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the approved label Jun 3, 2024
@rsun19
Copy link
Contributor Author

rsun19 commented Jun 3, 2024

Sorry, resolved merge conflicts

@christianvogt
Copy link
Contributor

/lgtm

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the lgtm label Jun 3, 2024
@openshift-merge-bot openshift-merge-bot bot merged commit b33db83 into opendatahub-io:main Jun 3, 2024
8 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants