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

Requests exception ordering #136

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

nickmoreton
Copy link
Collaborator

@nickmoreton nickmoreton commented Jan 3, 2022

Change the order of requests exceptions.

Changed following earlier MR comments: #134


  • Testing
    • CI passes
    • These changes do not reduce test coverage
  • Documentation.
    • Documentation changes are not necessary because: there is no change to the use of the package

@nickmoreton nickmoreton linked an issue Jan 3, 2022 that may be closed by this pull request
@codecov-commenter
Copy link

codecov-commenter commented Jan 3, 2022

Codecov Report

Merging #136 (37fce62) into main (10e4c17) will increase coverage by 0.55%.
The diff coverage is 100.00%.

Impacted file tree graph

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main     #136      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   64.97%   65.53%   +0.55%     
==========================================
  Files          32       32              
  Lines        1262     1262              
  Branches      227      227              
==========================================
+ Hits          820      827       +7     
+ Misses        400      393       -7     
  Partials       42       42              
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
wagtail_wordpress_import/block_builder_defaults.py 88.81% <100.00%> (+4.34%) ⬆️

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 10e4c17...37fce62. Read the comment docs.

@nickmoreton
Copy link
Collaborator Author

@Morsey187 Did you see this PR :)

I'm not entirely sure this is really the way to go and maybe it's been over thought and do we really need the level of exceptions here as we don't actually do much with the messages as yet.

As is stands the package seems to be working well without this and it's probably a better idea to alter it when we get around to the extra logging where the extra messages would be more useful.

I'd appreciate your thoughts on it. Thanks

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.

RequestException is the base class exception?
2 participants