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

test: ReactiveSequenceSpec ignore if jdk17 and CI #7009

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Mar 8, 2022

Conversation

@sdelamo sdelamo requested a review from timyates March 8, 2022 09:35
@sdelamo sdelamo force-pushed the reactive-sequence-ignore-if-jdk17 branch from 62241e0 to 7f2479d Compare March 8, 2022 09:35
@sdelamo sdelamo changed the title test: Reactive sequence ignore if jdk17 test: ReactiveSequenceSpec ignore if jdk17 and CI Mar 8, 2022
@timyates
Copy link
Contributor

timyates commented Mar 8, 2022

I can't see how that is only getting a single book 🤔

I worry this may actually be an issue?

@sdelamo
Copy link
Contributor Author

sdelamo commented Mar 8, 2022

I think we should revisit it. But for now, I think it is best to ignore it. It is making every build fail.

@sonarqubecloud
Copy link

sonarqubecloud bot commented Mar 8, 2022

Kudos, SonarCloud Quality Gate passed!    Quality Gate passed

Bug A 0 Bugs
Vulnerability A 0 Vulnerabilities
Security Hotspot A 0 Security Hotspots
Code Smell A 0 Code Smells

No Coverage information No Coverage information
No Duplication information No Duplication information

Copy link
Contributor

@timyates timyates left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

👍

@sdelamo
Copy link
Contributor Author

sdelamo commented Mar 8, 2022

I've created an issue so that we don't forget.

@sdelamo sdelamo merged commit 97f4d6b into 3.4.x Mar 8, 2022
@sdelamo sdelamo deleted the reactive-sequence-ignore-if-jdk17 branch March 8, 2022 09:57
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

2 participants