Skip to content

🧪💅 Refactor Codecov config metrics #1093

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

Merged
merged 9 commits into from
Mar 20, 2025

Conversation

webknjaz
Copy link
Member

This patch drops the project-wide Codecov metric.
The combined value is not very useful when one of the sources (MyPy)
has no chance at reaching 100%. We may want to reconsider in the
future. Instead, we'll have two separate “runtime coverage” metrics
for library code and tests that will be kept at 100%, while the
“type coverage” metric will remain at a lower threshold.

The “runtime coverage” is what we enforced, while MyPy results are
advisory.

When looking at Codecov, one will likely want to look at MyPy and
pytest flags separately. It is usually best to avoid looking at the
PR pages that sometimes display combined coverage incorrectly.

The change additionally disables the deprecated GitHub Annotations
integration in Codecov.

The default patch metric check is renamed to “runtime” to better
reflect its semantics. And another “typing” patch coverage metric
is now reported alongside it.

The badge coloring range now starts at 100%.

The combined value is not very useful when one of the sources (MyPy)
has no chance at reaching 100%. We may want to reconsider in the
future. Instead, we'll have two separate "runtime coverage" meterics
for library code and tests that will be kept at 100%, while the
"type coverage" metric will remain at lower threshold.

The "runtime coverage" is what we enforced, while MyPy results are
advisory.

When looking at Codecov, one will likely want to look at MyPy and
pytest flags separately. It is usually best to avoid looking at the
PR pages that sometimes display combined coverage incorrectly.
@webknjaz webknjaz self-assigned this Mar 20, 2025
webknjaz added a commit to webknjaz/multidict that referenced this pull request Mar 20, 2025
@psf-chronographer psf-chronographer bot added the bot:chronographer:provided There is a change note present in this PR label Mar 20, 2025
Copy link

codspeed-hq bot commented Mar 20, 2025

CodSpeed Performance Report

Merging #1093 will not alter performance

Comparing webknjaz:maintenance/codecov-refactor (c1236f7) with master (6a9f321)

Summary

✅ 62 untouched benchmarks

webknjaz added a commit to webknjaz/multidict that referenced this pull request Mar 20, 2025
@webknjaz webknjaz force-pushed the maintenance/codecov-refactor branch from c5962e4 to 92ca210 Compare March 20, 2025 23:11
@webknjaz webknjaz force-pushed the maintenance/codecov-refactor branch from 92ca210 to c1236f7 Compare March 20, 2025 23:18
@webknjaz webknjaz merged commit 1a81ced into aio-libs:master Mar 20, 2025
47 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
bot:chronographer:provided There is a change note present in this PR
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant