Feature/update av link for essentials #1487
Open
+194
−100
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
This reverts commit 65484e8.
bjnewman
force-pushed
the
feature/update-av-link-for-essentials
branch
from
103ab77 to
b00b020
Compare
bjnewman
requested review from
jordan-a-young,
LauRoxx and
gregmartDOTin
as code owners
Codecov ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #1487 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 92.17% 94.43% +2.25%
==========================================
Files 190 20 -170
Lines 5331 629 -4702
Branches 1644 212 -1432
==========================================
- Hits 4914 594 -4320
+ Misses 417 35 -382 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. 🚨 Try these New Features:
|
jordan-a-young
previously approved these changes
Nov 21, 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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
this change i made was not fully thought out and has had some negative feedback that it interferes with otherwise working implementations so we should revert until a fully thought out solution is available