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

fix: Include refs to pre-RFC drafts as refs to the RFC #6784

Merged
merged 10 commits into from
Dec 18, 2023

Conversation

jennifer-richards
Copy link
Member

On the person profile page, fixes ref counts to agree with what was showed pre-RFC model refactoring.

On the doc referencedBy page:

  • includes references to the draft that became the RFC
  • fixes the "As draft-..." badge which was broken during the feat/rfc work due to a confusing shadowed variable name

Copy link

codecov bot commented Dec 15, 2023

Codecov Report

Attention: 17 lines in your changes are missing coverage. Please review.

Comparison is base (501a5b8) 88.81% compared to head (12868c9) 88.78%.
Report is 6 commits behind head on main.

Files Patch % Lines
ietf/doc/views_search.py 28.57% 15 Missing ⚠️
ietf/doc/views_doc.py 50.00% 2 Missing ⚠️
Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #6784      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   88.81%   88.78%   -0.04%     
==========================================
  Files         285      285              
  Lines       40291    40324      +33     
==========================================
+ Hits        35785    35800      +15     
- Misses       4506     4524      +18     

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

The test_referenced_by_rfcs_as_rfc_or_draft() test
fails because there's a bug!
Let's do include refs to an rfc and its precursor draft
as separate refs. This almost surely indicates a data
error because it would mean an rfc referenced both an
rfc and the draft that it came from. That should never
be allowed, so at least let some light fall on it if
it happens.
@rjsparks rjsparks merged commit 149f82f into ietf-tools:main Dec 18, 2023
9 checks passed
@github-actions github-actions bot locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators Dec 22, 2023
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants