Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? # for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “#”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? # to your account

Add Jedis-5.0.0 Instrumentation Module #1969

Merged
merged 5 commits into from
Aug 3, 2024
Merged

Add Jedis-5.0.0 Instrumentation Module #1969

merged 5 commits into from
Aug 3, 2024

Conversation

deleonenriqueta
Copy link
Contributor

@deleonenriqueta deleonenriqueta commented Jul 3, 2024

Resolves Issue #1475

@codecov-commenter
Copy link

codecov-commenter commented Jul 3, 2024

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 70.61%. Comparing base (a418735) to head (3fa8221).
Report is 464 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files
@@             Coverage Diff              @@
##               main    #1969      +/-   ##
============================================
- Coverage     70.67%   70.61%   -0.06%     
- Complexity     9861     9873      +12     
============================================
  Files           826      829       +3     
  Lines         39792    39914     +122     
  Branches       6061     6077      +16     
============================================
+ Hits          28124    28187      +63     
- Misses         8946     8998      +52     
- Partials       2722     2729       +7     

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

@deleonenriqueta deleonenriqueta changed the title Add Jedis-5.0.0 Instrumentation Add Jedis-5.0.0 Instrumentation Module Jul 3, 2024
@deleonenriqueta deleonenriqueta marked this pull request as ready for review July 3, 2024 23:29
}

verifyInstrumentation {
passes 'redis.clients:jedis:[5.0.0,6.0.0)'
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

why not use

passesOnly 'redis.clients:jedis:[5.0.0,)

If it works for 6.0.0, then we won't have to change this. If it doesn't, the verify instrumentation will tell us about it.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

updated!

@deleonenriqueta deleonenriqueta merged commit 9338ecc into main Aug 3, 2024
111 checks passed
# for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? # to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants