-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 0
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
CI - 574 - Update codecov action to v4 #575
Conversation
@@ -0,0 +1 @@ | |||
CI - 574 - Update codecov action to v4 |
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 suppose we should add this directory to an exclusion? It's irritating, because in general it's good to spellcheck these things, but we don't want to be adding individual exemptions for individual packages.
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 raised ansys/actions#477 - It's going to happen to everyone, we should do it centrally
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's the approach for getting this PR merged then, are we blocked until that ticket is resolved?
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.
A splendid question, we could update our exclusion regex, but I don't know if you can exclude based on paths, or only on filenames. I wonder what pyMapdl is doing
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.
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.
Don't we already have the Vale.Terms = No included?
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.
Yes, I subsequently realised this, so I'm puzzled. Theres no exclusion in their pre-commit config file that I can see
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.
Maybe we just add codecov
as an allowed word
Codecov ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #575 +/- ##
=======================================
Coverage 94.25% 94.25%
=======================================
Files 7 7
Lines 783 783
=======================================
Hits 738 738
Misses 45 45 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
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.
This relies on a branch in ansys/actions. Shouldn't we wait for a new release?
I'd prefer to wait at least until the actions branch is merged into main, we can always point to a specific commit until a release is made if we want. |
Closes #574
Update the action to get rid of the node version warning