Skip to content

Conversation

mateuszkwiecinski
Copy link
Contributor

Fixes: #264

@mateuszkwiecinski mateuszkwiecinski linked an issue Oct 16, 2022 that may be closed by this pull request
@mateuszkwiecinski mateuszkwiecinski force-pushed the run_lint_with_process_isolation branch 2 times, most recently from 203414b to 9c8f09d Compare October 23, 2022 21:30
@mateuszkwiecinski mateuszkwiecinski force-pushed the run_lint_with_process_isolation branch from 9c8f09d to dd2b917 Compare January 5, 2023 06:37
@mateuszkwiecinski mateuszkwiecinski force-pushed the run_lint_with_process_isolation branch 2 times, most recently from 6b229e8 to ff27fdf Compare January 24, 2023 19:11
@mateuszkwiecinski mateuszkwiecinski force-pushed the incremental_lint branch 2 times, most recently from d845322 to cf34af6 Compare January 24, 2023 19:47
@mateuszkwiecinski mateuszkwiecinski marked this pull request as ready for review January 24, 2023 20:01
Copy link
Owner

@jeremymailen jeremymailen left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Looks good. Let me know what test cases we need to go through after integration to validate incremental is working as expected.

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.

Improve performance by making LintTask incremental

2 participants