Skip to content

Conversation

@rlskoeser
Copy link
Contributor

The Scientific Python repo-review tool was included in the original technical design document, in the developer-facing notes, which I was reminded of when I revised it recently in #338 .

Ran the review and made the recommended changes that were easy (does not address all flagged items).

@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Jan 20, 2026

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 99.65%. Comparing base (3799c3c) to head (7f2fde0).
⚠️ Report is 1 commits behind head on develop.

Additional details and impacted files
@@           Coverage Diff            @@
##           develop     #339   +/-   ##
========================================
  Coverage    99.65%   99.65%           
========================================
  Files           32       32           
  Lines         2336     2336           
  Branches       101      101           
========================================
  Hits          2328     2328           
  Misses           1        1           
  Partials         7        7           
🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
  • ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

@rlskoeser rlskoeser added the 👇this sprint Work scheduled for the current sprint label Jan 20, 2026
@rlskoeser rlskoeser merged commit 71dbcdd into develop Jan 20, 2026
8 of 9 checks passed
@rlskoeser rlskoeser deleted the feature/address-repo-review branch January 20, 2026 22:00
@rlskoeser rlskoeser self-assigned this Jan 20, 2026
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

👇this sprint Work scheduled for the current sprint

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants