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

[Fix] Github Action Issues #3759

Merged
merged 28 commits into from
Feb 15, 2025
Merged

Conversation

cschuchardt88
Copy link
Member

@cschuchardt88 cschuchardt88 commented Feb 13, 2025

Description

  • Optimized linux action tests
  • Fix issue with test not displaying errors
  • Fix crashes issue with zip files
  • Added continue-on-error: true ONLY for step Coveralls -- (this sends the coverage files)

Zip Issue Fixed:

/home/runner/work/neo/neo/src/Plugins/LevelDBStore/LevelDBStore.csproj(14,5): error MSB3932: Failed to unzip file "obj/libleveldb-win-arm64.zip" because the file does not exist or is inaccessible. [TargetFramework=net9.0]

Type of change

  • Optimization (the change is only an optimization)
  • Style (the change is only a code style for better maintenance or standard purpose)
  • Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
  • New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
  • Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to not work as expected)
  • This change requires a documentation update

Checklist:

  • My code follows the style guidelines of this project
  • I have performed a self-review of my code
  • I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
  • I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
  • My changes generate no new warnings
  • I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works
  • New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes
  • Any dependent changes have been merged and published in downstream modules

@shargon
Copy link
Member

shargon commented Feb 13, 2025

Continue on error is better false, the maintenance was not the problem that we suffer randomly

@cschuchardt88
Copy link
Member Author

cschuchardt88 commented Feb 13, 2025

Continue on error is better false, the maintenance was not the problem that we suffer randomly.

Im 99% sure its fixed now with this PR. But only one thing to do now.... we wait...

Also Continue-on-error doen't matter in this cause. And its not needed for the fix either. I Think the step needs to continue. Its just uploading the coverage files. No biggy.

.github/workflows/main.yml Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@shargon
Copy link
Member

shargon commented Feb 14, 2025

Coverage decreased? Any project is not taken into account I think

@cschuchardt88
Copy link
Member Author

Coverage decreased? Any project is not taken into account I think

Its because I removed the upload of Neo.Unittests project since it would be empty or excluded.

@shargon
Copy link
Member

shargon commented Feb 14, 2025

Coverage decreased? Any project is not taken into account I think

Its because I removed the upload of Neo.Unittests project since it would be empty or excluded.

why it's excluded or empty? it's the main one

@cschuchardt88
Copy link
Member Author

cschuchardt88 commented Feb 14, 2025

why it's excluded or empty? it's the main one

#3712

Test will still report the errors in Neo.UnitTests but not upload the coverage file.

@shargon
Copy link
Member

shargon commented Feb 14, 2025

why it's excluded or empty? it's the main one

#3712

Test will still report the errors in Neo.UnitTests but not upload the coverage file.

Why we don't want the coverage of the main repo?

@cschuchardt88
Copy link
Member Author

Why we don't want the coverage of the main repo?

Well maybe i'm confused on what -p:Exclude="[Neo.UnitTests]*" does.

@shargon
Copy link
Member

shargon commented Feb 14, 2025

We want to exclude tests from coverage, but not execute those tests

@cschuchardt88
Copy link
Member Author

cschuchardt88 commented Feb 14, 2025

We want to exclude tests from coverage, but not execute those tests

thats what i did, but now i added back upload. Thats not how -p:Exclude="[Neo.UnitTests]*" works, that is why i removed it before. You have to remove the upload for that test if u want it Excluded.

-p:Exclude="[Neo.UnitTests]* does NOTHING! https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/api/microsoft.build.tasks.createitem.exclude?view=msbuild-17-netcore

@shargon
Copy link
Member

shargon commented Feb 14, 2025

-p:Exclude="[Neo.UnitTests]* does NOTHING!

There was some UT that reference Neo.Unittests, so this decrease the coverage before because this assemblies was included, that's why this assembly is ignored in coverage

@cschuchardt88
Copy link
Member Author

cschuchardt88 commented Feb 14, 2025

-p:Exclude="[Neo.UnitTests]* does NOTHING!

There was some UT that reference Neo.Unittests, so this decrease the coverage before because this assemblies was included, that's why this assembly is ignored in coverage

Than I'll do that the right way... But in other PR

@shargon
Copy link
Member

shargon commented Feb 14, 2025

-p:Exclude="[Neo.UnitTests]* does NOTHING! https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/api/microsoft.build.tasks.createitem.exclude?view=msbuild-17-netcore

https://github.com/coverlet-coverage/coverlet/blob/master/Documentation/MSBuildIntegration.md#filters

@cschuchardt88
Copy link
Member Author

cschuchardt88 commented Feb 14, 2025

https://github.com/coverlet-coverage/coverlet/blob/master/Documentation/MSBuildIntegration.md#filters

With testing it doesn't generate a coverage.info file. So it was right to remove the upload of the coverage file. However it looks like thats not what you want.

Nevermind, Im retesting. Used wrong file.

@cschuchardt88
Copy link
Member Author

cschuchardt88 commented Feb 14, 2025

done

@cschuchardt88
Copy link
Member Author

@shargon This PR is ready.

@shargon shargon merged commit 251cb6d into neo-project:master Feb 15, 2025
7 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants