-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 2k
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
Add more information to contributing page #7916
Conversation
Codecov ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #7916 +/- ##
=======================================
Coverage 97.48% 97.48%
=======================================
Files 107 107
Lines 32600 32600
Branches 3800 3800
=======================================
Hits 31781 31781
Misses 616 616
Partials 203 203
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more. ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
Co-authored-by: Sviatoslav Sydorenko <sviat@redhat.com>
Backport to 3.9: 💚 backport PR created✅ Backport PR branch: Backported as #8072 🤖 @patchback |
Mostly revamp coverage section with an example demonstrating how to analyse covecov reports. --------- Co-authored-by: Sviatoslav Sydorenko <sviat@redhat.com> (cherry picked from commit 822fbc7)
Backport to 3.10: 💚 backport PR created✅ Backport PR branch: Backported as #8073 🤖 @patchback |
Mostly revamp coverage section with an example demonstrating how to analyse covecov reports. --------- Co-authored-by: Sviatoslav Sydorenko <sviat@redhat.com> (cherry picked from commit 822fbc7)
|
||
.. tip:: | ||
Sometimes the diff on *codecov.io* doesn't make sense. This is usually | ||
caused by the branch being out of sync with master. Try merging |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@Dreamsorcerer this isn't exactly the case I meant. What I'm talking about is GHA attempting to upload coverage and getting HTTP 500 from Codecov API in some or all of the jobs. Sometimes, restarting those jobs doesn't help and it just keeps erroring out for hours.
This means that part of the coverage uploads happened from some envs, but not all. And depending on which ones failed, the coverage may show up lower than it actually is.
To make things worse, by default, the GHA step doing the upload succeeds silently. And the only way to discover if some jobs didn't actually upload coverage is to click through each CI job, expand that step and read the log (it'll either have a URL of the upload for the current commit/PR or some error message at the end of the console output).
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
What I'm talking about is GHA attempting to upload coverage and getting HTTP 500 from Codecov API in some or all of the jobs.
Oh, I think I enabled the option to fail CI if an error occurs in upload (unless it was a different repo), so we shouldn't get that happening anymore.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Different repo, probably. But still, I'm not sure if that option is what we want — it effectively marks entire jobs as failing. And whenever Codecov has platform issues, that means fully blocking merges for hours if not days.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Problem is that we've had several repos which have been failing coverage uploads for a long time, due to configuration issues. I've personally not seen codecov fail on upload as an issue on their end yet.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I've definitely seen some. Both in aio-libs and other places. It's sometimes flaky on their platform side. And restarts result in HTTP 500, then in several hours it just works when restarted. And I observed these outages affecting repos in different orgs in the same time frame, while their status pages happily reported "no platform issues".
And that is the primary reason https://hynek.me/articles/ditch-codecov-python/ is a thing.
I actually think, parts of that article should be implemented here too. Maybe, not in place of Codecov but additionally to it.
P.S. In the past I also blamed misconfiguration a lot of times. But that doesn't account for when its not the case.
@@ -1,15 +1,23 @@ | |||
.. _Adding change notes with your PRs: |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Changing this label is going to be problematic as other projects rely on it for referring the changelog guidelines from other places. Not all the PR recommendations set. It'll have to be reverted.
.. _Adding change notes with your PRs: | ||
.. _Making a pull request: | ||
|
||
Making a pull request |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@Dreamsorcerer this title was a mistake:
- Since it's rendered on GitHub in a folder with change notes, on any branch, it shouldn't really mention the PR process that much — just the process for having the changelog.
- The Sphinx site now has 2 subsequent titles with the same name but different capitalization — https://docs.aiohttp.org/en/stable/contributing.html#making-a-pull-request and https://docs.aiohttp.org/en/stable/contributing.html#id2.
|
||
When making a pull request, please include a short summary of the changes | ||
and a reference to any issue tickets that the PR is intended to solve. | ||
All PRs with code changes should include tests. All changes should |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yeah, I missed that this now refers to tests that are not related to the https://github.com/aio-libs/aiohttp/tree/master/CHANGES#readme directory at all.
…tion to contributing page (#7916)" (#8109) **This is a backport of PR #8107 as merged into master (854e6d8).** This partially reverts commit 822fbc7. In particular, this drops the top level title from README in the `CHANGES/` folder and restores the original label. For the proper Sphinx ToC structuring, a title in the `docs/contributing.rst` document. Co-authored-by: Sviatoslav Sydorenko <wk@sydorenko.org.ua>
…ion to contributing page (#7916)" (#8108) **This is a backport of PR #8107 as merged into master (854e6d8).** This partially reverts commit 822fbc7. In particular, this drops the top level title from README in the `CHANGES/` folder and restores the original label. For the proper Sphinx ToC structuring, a title in the `docs/contributing.rst` document. Co-authored-by: Sviatoslav Sydorenko <wk@sydorenko.org.ua>
@@ -220,47 +260,19 @@ To run spell checker on Linux box you should install it first: | |||
$ sudo apt-get install enchant | |||
$ pip install sphinxcontrib-spelling | |||
|
|||
Changelog update |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@Dreamsorcerer I think you had Sphinx problems because you didn't keep this title as in examples. I applied a partial revert and there's no errors.
Mostly revamp coverage section with an example demonstrating how to analyse covecov reports.
I think #7829 works as a perfect example of how codecov is really useful to us.
Preview: https://aiohttp--7916.org.readthedocs.build/en/7916/contributing.html#tests-coverage