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

Review and configure PR status checks #5978

Closed
igor-sirotin opened this issue Oct 22, 2024 · 2 comments · Fixed by #6005
Closed

Review and configure PR status checks #5978

igor-sirotin opened this issue Oct 22, 2024 · 2 comments · Fixed by #6005
Assignees

Comments

@igor-sirotin
Copy link
Collaborator

  1. Introduduce 1% threshold for project coverage
  2. Check if anything else needs to be tackled
@igor-sirotin igor-sirotin self-assigned this Oct 22, 2024
@igor-sirotin igor-sirotin changed the title Review and configure PR Tstatus checks Review and configure PR status checks Oct 23, 2024
@igor-sirotin
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Looking at appropriate threshold values.

According to all currently open PRs,

  • For project/functional-tests I will set 0.1%. In most cases it's ~0.01-0.02%, but there's one case of -0.06%
  • For project/unit-tests I will set 1%. Here's some biggest of the fluctuations:
    project/unit-tests (46.76% (-0.45%) compared to 86cd41d)
    project/unit-tests (46.88% (-0.27%) compared to fadce93)
    project/unit-tests (46.75% (-0.28%) compared to 55bad8f)
    project/unit-tests (46.73% (-0.35%) compared to ba37c32)
    

@igor-sirotin
Copy link
Collaborator Author

igor-sirotin commented Oct 28, 2024

Just in case, here're the full table for passing checks:

PR Checks
#6004 - project/functional-tests (0.00% (+0.00%) compared to 8661a71)
- project/unit-tests (No coverage information found on head)
- project (0.00% (+0.00%) compared to 8661a71)
#6003 - project/functional-tests (No coverage information found on head)
- project/unit-tests (46.99% (-0.01%) compared to d99fdf1, passed because coverage increased by 0% when compared to adjusted base (46.99%))
- project (46.99% (-0.51%) compared to d99fdf1)
#5999 - project/functional-tests (No coverage information found on head)
- project/unit-tests (46.96% (-0.02%) compared to d77d243)
- project (46.96% (-0.53%) compared to d77d243)
#5996 - project/functional-tests (10.20% (-0.04%) compared to 097d19a)
- project/unit-tests (46.96% (+0.00%) compared to 097d19a)
- project (47.47% (+0.00%) compared to 097d19a)
#5995 - project/functional-tests (10.24% (+0.00%) compared to 097d19a)
- project/unit-tests (No coverage information found on head)
- project (10.24% (-37.23%) compared to 097d19a)
#5990 - project/functional-tests (8.44% (-1.79%) compared to d99fdf1)
- project/unit-tests (No coverage information found on head)
- project (8.44% (-39.06%) compared to d99fdf1)
#5989 - project/unit-tests (46.97% (-0.02%) compared to c72f491)
- project (47.48% (-0.02%) compared to c72f491)
- project/functional-tests (10.20% (+0.01%) compared to c72f491)
#5988 - project/functional-tests (10.20% (+0.01%) compared to c72f491)
- project/unit-tests (46.96% (-0.03%) compared to c72f491)
- project (47.47% (-0.02%) compared to c72f491)
#5973 - project/functional-tests (10.60% (-0.06%) compared to 3179532)
- project/unit-tests (No coverage information found on head)
- project (10.60% (-37.03%) compared to 3179532)
#5970 - project/functional-tests (10.65% (-0.01%) compared to 132ea05, passed because coverage increased by 0.06% when compared to adjusted base (10.58%))
- project/unit-tests (No coverage information found on head)
- project (10.65% (-37.01%) compared to 132ea05)
#5959 - project/functional-tests (No coverage information found on base report)
- project/unit-tests (46.76% (-0.45%) compared to 86cd41d)
- project (47.45% (+0.23%) compared to 86cd41d)
#5958 - project/functional-tests (10.40% (-0.04%) compared to 4c88939)
- project/unit-tests (46.75% (-0.01%) compared to 4c88939)
- project (47.44% (-0.01%) compared to 4c88939, passed because coverage increased by 0% when compared to adjusted base (47.45%))
#5950 - project/functional-tests (No coverage information found on base report)
- project/unit-tests (46.88% (-0.27%) compared to fadce93)
- project (47.56% (+0.42%) compared to fadce93)
#5947 - project/unit-tests (46.98% (+0.02%) compared to 097d19a)
- project (47.48% (+0.02%) compared to 097d19a)
- project/functional-tests (10.18% (-0.06%) compared to 097d19a)
#5946 - project/functional-tests (No coverage information found on base report)
- project/unit-tests (No coverage information found on head)
- project (0.00% (-47.15%) compared to fadce93)
#5939 - project/functional-tests (10.77% (+0.12%) compared to 3179532)
- project/unit-tests (47.67% (+0.72%) compared to 3179532)
- project (48.35% (+0.72%) compared to 3179532)
#5929 - project/functional-tests (No coverage information found on base report)
- project/unit-tests (46.75% (-0.28%) compared to 55bad8f)
- project (47.44% (+0.42%) compared to 55bad8f)
#5925 - project/functional-tests (10.38% (+0.16%) compared to ba37c32)
- project/unit-tests (46.73% (-0.35%) compared to ba37c32)
- project (47.44% (-0.36%) compared to ba37c32)

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
Status: Done
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

1 participant