ci: configure codecov patch threshold

[Shinigami92]

The threshold is not useful as it only fails PRs that are successfully but the threshold is not meet.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Merging #647 (adf893e) into main (6e29767) will increase coverage by 0.00%.
The diff coverage is n/a.

❗ Current head adf893e differs from pull request most recent head ba1ec67. Consider uploading reports for the commit ba1ec67 to get more accurate results

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main     #647   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   99.33%   99.33%           
=======================================
  Files        1923     1923           
  Lines      176853   176853           
  Branches      906      908    +2     
=======================================
+ Hits       175681   175683    +2     
+ Misses       1116     1114    -2     
  Partials       56       56           

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
src/vendor/unique.ts	95.16% <0.00%> (+1.61%)	⬆️

[Shinigami92]

Okay I think I found the issue!
We need to explicitly configure a patch block beside the project block, it always took not our configs but the one provided by codecov

[griest024]

2% threshold seems large. Why not 0% or at worst, 1%?

[Shinigami92]

2% threshold seems large. Why not 0% or at worst, 1%?

@griest024 Okay I may have misunderstood threshold, maybe you could try to explain me what is going on.

The initial issue here is that the CI failed several times with the codecov/patch action.
I found out that it doesn't take the config we set for codecov/project default, so I needed to explicitly configured it for patch.

I assume setting the threshold to 0% will not help again, cause the default may was be 0% by default previously. (I could be wrong)
But everytime we did a helpful refactoring that moved some parts, the patch action failed and marked the whole PR as ❌, were every other action was ✅ and the PR is good to go. So it just may confused people and especially maintainers that there was something broken or wrong, but it was not.

So I would like to first try and drive for a while with my proposed settings in this PR.
If something is still bad, we can change it in a future PR anyway.

[griest024]

@Shinigami92 from the docs

Allow the coverage to drop by X%, and posting a success status.

It's possible that there is some broken logic for 0% that will fail PRs that should have passed. I would think that 1% would avoid this.