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

revert: remark-gfm 4.0.0 -> 3.0.1 #921

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Oct 26, 2023
Merged

revert: remark-gfm 4.0.0 -> 3.0.1 #921

merged 2 commits into from
Oct 26, 2023

Conversation

MasterIceZ
Copy link
Member

No description provided.

@MasterIceZ MasterIceZ requested a review from a team October 26, 2023 03:54
@vercel
Copy link

vercel bot commented Oct 26, 2023

The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for Git ↗︎

Name Status Preview Comments Updated (UTC)
programming-in-th ✅ Ready (Inspect) Visit Preview 💬 Add feedback Oct 26, 2023 5:03am

@github-actions
Copy link

github-actions bot commented Oct 26, 2023

Coverage Report

Status Category Percentage Covered / Total
🔵 Lines 100% 147 / 147
🔵 Statements 100% 147 / 147
🔵 Functions 100% 4 / 4
🔵 Branches 100% 17 / 17
File CoverageNo changed files found.
Generated in workflow #269

Comment on lines +1 to +9
import { test, expect } from '@playwright/test'

test('Can render solution', async ({ page }) => {
await page.goto('/tasks/0000')

const solutionLocator = await page.getByText('Solution')
await page.getByRole('button').filter({ has: solutionLocator }).click()
await expect(page).toHaveURL('/tasks/0000/solution')
})
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

orz

@leomotors leomotors merged commit 3d833ab into main Oct 26, 2023
@leomotors leomotors deleted the revert/remark-gfm branch October 26, 2023 10:47
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.

2 participants