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

SDCSRM-542 Dependabot Security Only PRs #345

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Jul 2, 2024

Conversation

dbanks91
Copy link
Contributor

@dbanks91 dbanks91 commented Jul 1, 2024

Motivation and Context

We want to limit the amount of dependabot PRs

What has changed

Enabled grouping and only allowed security PRs

How to test?

Check it looks ok

Links

SDCSRM-542

@dbanks91 dbanks91 added the patch A non-feature change, e.g. bug or issue fix label Jul 1, 2024
Copy link

codecov bot commented Jul 1, 2024

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 49.85%. Comparing base (1be32ab) to head (4e534ae).

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff            @@
##               main     #345   +/-   ##
=========================================
  Coverage     49.85%   49.85%           
  Complexity      366      366           
=========================================
  Files            98       98           
  Lines          2710     2710           
  Branches        130      130           
=========================================
  Hits           1351     1351           
  Misses         1291     1291           
  Partials         68       68           

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

@dbanks91 dbanks91 merged commit afc7269 into main Jul 2, 2024
5 checks passed
@dbanks91 dbanks91 deleted the SDCSRM-542-dependabot-security-only-prs branch July 2, 2024 14:08
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
patch A non-feature change, e.g. bug or issue fix
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants