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

[infra] Coverage issues #812

Closed
dcharkes opened this issue Nov 20, 2023 · 5 comments
Closed

[infra] Coverage issues #812

dcharkes opened this issue Nov 20, 2023 · 5 comments
Labels
type-infra A repository infrastructure change or enhancement

Comments

@dcharkes
Copy link
Collaborator

Now that we have added coverage from multiple workflows, Coveralls is forgetting the coverage from other workflows.
image

FFIgen CI ran last:
image

This is a reintroduction of #10:

It combines coverage from jobs from a single workflow but not jobs from separate workflows.

Secondly, Coveralls doesn't seem to find the source file locations:
image

We should either see if we can fix the setup for Coveralls, or switch to CodeCov (#70 (comment)).

cc @HosseinYousefi @liamappelbe

@dcharkes dcharkes added the type-infra A repository infrastructure change or enhancement label Nov 20, 2023
@HosseinYousefi
Copy link
Member

The source not available problem might be because you have not signed in?

@dcharkes
Copy link
Collaborator Author

The source not available problem might be because you have not signed in?

Thanks!

I wonder why one needs to be signed in to see the source code of a public repo? 🤔

@HosseinYousefi
Copy link
Member

I wonder why one needs to be signed in to see the source code of a public repo? 🤔

I had wondered the same before! Btw the PR doesn't seem to work, I also pushed some code to trigger jnigen's CI as well, but coverall still only shows ffigen's coverage.

@dcharkes
Copy link
Collaborator Author

The flag name seems to be ignored for ffigen: https://coveralls.io/builds/64057741
But then works fine for jnigen: https://coveralls.io/builds/64057335

The only difference I can see is parallel: true and then a separate call to finish the coverage. That should not influence it.

@dcharkes
Copy link
Collaborator Author

It looks like coverage is now working as expected: #819 (comment)

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
type-infra A repository infrastructure change or enhancement
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants