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/codecov experiment #76

Merged
merged 11 commits into from
Dec 12, 2022
Merged

Fix/codecov experiment #76

merged 11 commits into from
Dec 12, 2022

Conversation

ivirshup
Copy link
Member

Experimenting to get #71 working

@ivirshup ivirshup marked this pull request as draft December 12, 2022 15:37
@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Dec 12, 2022

Codecov Report

Merging #76 (c8b9087) into main (9aafb47) will increase coverage by 86.73%.
The diff coverage is n/a.

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##            main      #76       +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   0.00%   86.73%   +86.73%     
==========================================
  Files         16       16               
  Lines       1523     1523               
==========================================
+ Hits           0     1321     +1321     
+ Misses      1523      202     -1321     
Flag Coverage Δ
unittests ?

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

Impacted Files Coverage Δ
spatialdata/_types.py 62.50% <0.00%> (+62.50%) ⬆️
spatialdata/utils.py 68.57% <0.00%> (+68.57%) ⬆️
spatialdata/_io/format.py 76.08% <0.00%> (+76.08%) ⬆️
spatialdata/_core/models.py 78.40% <0.00%> (+78.40%) ⬆️
spatialdata/_core/coordinate_system.py 89.18% <0.00%> (+89.18%) ⬆️
spatialdata/_core/core_utils.py 91.56% <0.00%> (+91.56%) ⬆️
spatialdata/_logging.py 92.85% <0.00%> (+92.85%) ⬆️
spatialdata/_core/transformations.py 95.39% <0.00%> (+95.39%) ⬆️
spatialdata/_core/_spatialdata.py 95.97% <0.00%> (+95.97%) ⬆️
spatialdata/_io/write.py 96.58% <0.00%> (+96.58%) ⬆️
... and 4 more

@ivirshup ivirshup marked this pull request as ready for review December 12, 2022 15:59
@ivirshup ivirshup requested a review from giovp December 12, 2022 15:59
@ivirshup
Copy link
Member Author

@giovp, it takes a little bit for the coverage action to run, and it's not added to the checks until after it runs.

Maybe we should make it a required check?

- name: Install dependencies
run: |
pip install ".[dev,test]"
pip install -e ".[dev,test]"
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

do you think this made it work? or what was it otherwise?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Yes, it wasn't collecting the coverage otherwise. I can locally reproduce that installing without -e prevents collection of the coverage.

I vaguely remember this being an issue before. I think it came up for anndata – though it's not using -e now and I can't tell what's different 😅. There's also some reason we make the cookiecutter do an editable install too.

I think it had something to do with the install being a wheel, and being able to trace the code being tested to the wheel?

@giovp
Copy link
Member

giovp commented Dec 12, 2022

Maybe we should make it a required check?

we could make it a required check

@ivirshup
Copy link
Member Author

I'll merge this then open an issue for getting coverage to run without doing an editable install

@ivirshup ivirshup merged commit 1f91773 into main Dec 12, 2022
This was referenced Dec 12, 2022
@ivirshup ivirshup deleted the fix/codecov-experiment branch December 12, 2022 17:44
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants