Skip to content

Update dependency @types/chrome to ^0.0.308 #242

Update dependency @types/chrome to ^0.0.308

Update dependency @types/chrome to ^0.0.308 #242

Triggered via pull request January 5, 2025 22:56
Status Failure
Total duration 32s
Artifacts

node.js.yml

on: pull_request
Matrix: build
Fit to window
Zoom out
Zoom in

Annotations

3 errors and 13 warnings
build (18.x)
Process completed with exit code 1.
build (16.x)
The job was canceled because "_18_x" failed.
build (16.x)
The operation was canceled.
build (18.x)
ubuntu-latest pipelines will use ubuntu-24.04 soon. For more details, see https://github.com/actions/runner-images/issues/10636
build (18.x): background-script.js#L107
Prefer using an optional chain expression instead, as it's more concise and easier to read
build (18.x): background-script.js#L166
Prefer using an optional chain expression instead, as it's more concise and easier to read
build (18.x): background-script.js#L173
["tabPosition"] is better written in dot notation
build (18.x): background-script.js#L182
Prefer using an optional chain expression instead, as it's more concise and easier to read
build (18.x): content-script.js#L30
Prefer using an optional chain expression instead, as it's more concise and easier to read
build (18.x): content-script.js#L31
Prefer using an optional chain expression instead, as it's more concise and easier to read
build (16.x): background-script.js#L107
Prefer using an optional chain expression instead, as it's more concise and easier to read
build (16.x): background-script.js#L166
Prefer using an optional chain expression instead, as it's more concise and easier to read
build (16.x): background-script.js#L173
["tabPosition"] is better written in dot notation
build (16.x): background-script.js#L182
Prefer using an optional chain expression instead, as it's more concise and easier to read
build (16.x): content-script.js#L30
Prefer using an optional chain expression instead, as it's more concise and easier to read
build (16.x): content-script.js#L31
Prefer using an optional chain expression instead, as it's more concise and easier to read