fix: add more information to detected flakes logs #728
Conversation
Codecov ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅ ✅ All tests successful. No failed tests found. @@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #728 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 97.92% 98.07% +0.14%
==========================================
Files 434 434
Lines 36733 36798 +65
==========================================
+ Hits 35971 36089 +118
+ Misses 762 709 -53
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.
|
Codecov ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅
✅ All tests successful. No failed tests found. @@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #728 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 97.92% 98.07% +0.14%
==========================================
Files 434 434
Lines 36733 36798 +65
==========================================
+ Hits 35971 36089 +118
+ Misses 762 709 -53
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.
|
Codecov ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅
Changes have been made to critical files, which contain lines commonly executed in production. Learn more ✅ All tests successful. No failed tests found. Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #728 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 97.97% 98.15% +0.17%
==========================================
Files 475 475
Lines 38088 38707 +619
==========================================
+ Hits 37318 37991 +673
+ Misses 770 716 -54
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.
... and 15 files with indirect coverage changes This change has been scanned for critical changes. Learn more |
Codecov ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅
✅ All tests successful. No failed tests found. @@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #728 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 97.92% 98.07% +0.14%
==========================================
Files 434 434
Lines 36733 36798 +65
==========================================
+ Hits 35971 36089 +118
+ Misses 762 709 -53
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.
|
| @@ -357,6 +357,7 @@ def process_impl_within_lock( | |||
| "Detected failure on test that has been identified as flaky", | |||
| extra=dict( | |||
| success=success, | |||
| notifier_result=notifier_result.value, | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Would using the .name be more readable?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
the definition of the notifier result looks like:
class NotifierResult(Enum):
COMMENT_POSTED = "comment_posted"
TORNGIT_ERROR = "torngit_error"
NO_PULL = "no_pull"
so i think either name or value should be fine
No description provided.