Skip to content
This repository was archived by the owner on Nov 19, 2024. It is now read-only.

Conversation

uhafner
Copy link
Member

@uhafner uhafner commented Mar 21, 2023

Currently, there are too many assumptions about the existing values. We need to add some guards to improve the title so that only meaningful results are actually produces.

  • When there are modified lines, print coverages of those lines. Otherwise, fall back to project coverage.

Will close #580.

When there are modified lines, print coverages of those lines.
Otherwise, fall back to project coverage.
@uhafner uhafner added the enhancement Enhancement of existing functionality label Mar 21, 2023
@uhafner uhafner marked this pull request as ready for review March 23, 2023 07:07
@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Mar 23, 2023

Codecov Report

Merging #587 (5078829) into master (d14733d) will increase coverage by 0.15%.
The diff coverage is 93.61%.

@@             Coverage Diff              @@
##             master     #587      +/-   ##
============================================
+ Coverage     72.16%   72.32%   +0.15%     
- Complexity     1550     1575      +25     
============================================
  Files           127      127              
  Lines          6068     6059       -9     
  Branches        633      637       +4     
============================================
+ Hits           4379     4382       +3     
+ Misses         1473     1456      -17     
- Partials        216      221       +5     
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
...gins/coverage/metrics/steps/CoverageViewModel.java 51.58% <ø> (ø)
...overage/metrics/steps/CoverageChecksPublisher.java 90.50% <92.85%> (-1.73%) ⬇️
...ugins/coverage/metrics/model/ElementFormatter.java 56.20% <100.00%> (+4.35%) ⬆️
...ns/coverage/metrics/steps/CoverageBuildAction.java 76.36% <100.00%> (+9.07%) ⬆️

📣 We’re building smart automated test selection to slash your CI/CD build times. Learn more

@uhafner uhafner merged commit d45b444 into master Mar 23, 2023
@uhafner uhafner deleted the skip-not-existing-checks-details branch March 23, 2023 20:11
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.

Labels

enhancement Enhancement of existing functionality

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Checks publisher should only print results for types that are available

1 participant