Use `GITHUB_REPOSITORY` as the default repo when no `repo` option is configured in `changelog-github` by Andarist · Pull Request #2120 · changesets/changesets · GitHub
Skip to content

Use GITHUB_REPOSITORY as the default repo when no repo option is configured in changelog-github - #2120

Closed
Andarist wants to merge 2 commits into
mainfrom
use-repo-env
Closed

Andarist wants to merge 2 commits into
mainfrom
use-repo-env

Conversation

@Andarist

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

just a small potential quality of life improvement

@Andarist
Andarist requested review from beeequeue and bluwy June 24, 2026 10:05
@changeset-bot

changeset-bot Bot commented Jun 24, 2026 •

Copy link
Copy Markdown

@codecov

codecov Bot commented Jun 24, 2026 •

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 87.50000% with 2 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 86.04%. Comparing base (6c79210) to head (f74c864).

Files with missing lines Patch % Lines
packages/changelog-github/src/index.ts 87.50% 2 Missing ⚠️
Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #2120      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   85.49%   86.04%   +0.55%     
==========================================
  Files          70       70              
  Lines        2550     2558       +8     
  Branches      687      693       +6     
==========================================
+ Hits         2180     2201      +21     
+ Misses        339      330       -9     
+ Partials       31       27       -4     

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

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
  • ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
  • 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

@bluwy bluwy left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Can you address or comment on why we didn't go with #1871? And is there things there we can port here?

@Andarist

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

@Andarist Andarist closed this Jun 26, 2026
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.

3 participants