Skip to content

Add Coverage workflow #623

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

Open
wants to merge 17 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from
Open

Add Coverage workflow #623

wants to merge 17 commits into from

Conversation

Daraan
Copy link
Contributor

@Daraan Daraan commented Jul 7, 2025

Added a coverage workflow (resolves: #520).

Currently the logic is to upload one coverage file from each version test.

pip install coverage & coverage -m unittest

A crucial point about this workflow is that it installs and runs the test with coverage -m unittest and not python -m unittest anymore. coverage does (currently) not install typing_extensions so I think that is a safe pip install (at the moment). I tried to add a weak test that assures that typing_extensions.__file__ is indeed the one in src/ and not site-packages, but that test fails on the pypi installation


Do you prefer any changes here? e.g. run first with python when install and run again with coverage?

Does anyone know why the pypy 3.9 and 3.10 tests fail here? Some kind of code leakage, missing monkeypatch?

EDIT:

  • Changed to not run coverage on the pypi versions

@AlexWaygood
Copy link
Member

if it's a pain to run PyPy tests under coverage, I think it would be fine to do the pypy tests as a separate CI job that aren't run under coverage. None of our code is currently PyPy-specific (we had a workaround for a PyPy bug for a while but it was a tiny branch of code).

Copy link
Member

@AlexWaygood AlexWaygood left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Nice, thank you!

@AlexWaygood
Copy link
Member

Could you fix the pre-commit failures?

Copy link
Member

@AlexWaygood AlexWaygood left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM if we can get the PR comment thing working! (I don't think I have the necessary permissions for that either)

@Daraan
Copy link
Contributor Author

Daraan commented Jul 7, 2025

According to https://docs.github.com/actions/how-tos/security-for-github-actions/security-guides/automatic-token-authentication, a PR from a fork can never have write access (expect the repo itself).

A relevant bit:

Finally, if the workflow was triggered by a pull request from a forked repository, and the Send write tokens to workflows from pull requests setting is not selected, the permissions are adjusted to change any write permissions to read only.


Maintainers note from the action on the error: https://github.com/marocchino/sticky-pull-request-comment/tree/v2/#error-resource-not-accessible-by-integration

check your Settings > Actions > General > Workflow permissions, and make sure to enable read and write permissions.

The alternative is to provide a GITHUB_TOKEN (defaults to ${{ github.token }}) currently.

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.

Add test coverage monitoring
2 participants