Move test summary to after coverage report #4104

[hramezani]

Summary
Move test summary to after coverage report issue_4104

Test plan

[facebook-github-bot]

Thank you for your pull request and welcome to our community. We require contributors to sign our Contributor License Agreement, and we don't seem to have you on file. In order for us to review and merge your code, please sign up at https://code.facebook.com/cla. If you are contributing on behalf of someone else (eg your employer), the individual CLA may not be sufficient and your employer may need the corporate CLA signed.

If you have received this in error or have any questions, please contact us at [email protected]. Thanks!

[facebook-github-bot]

Thank you for signing our Contributor License Agreement. We can now accept your code for this (and any) Facebook open source project. Thanks!

[SimenB]

@hramezani This is failing lint (just yarn lint --fix and you should be good) and a single test on appveyor (which seems totally unreleated, maybe just rerun it? You can try rebasing on master and force pushing).

Can you add a test for this? Some sort of integration test with a snapshot of the output showing that it's placed correctly would be sweet 🙂

[codecov-io]

Codecov Report

Merging #4512 into master will decrease coverage by <.01%.
The diff coverage is 75%.

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #4512      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   56.18%   56.18%   -0.01%     
==========================================
  Files         194      194              
  Lines        6546     6548       +2     
  Branches        3        3              
==========================================
+ Hits         3678     3679       +1     
- Misses       2867     2868       +1     
  Partials        1        1

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
packages/jest-cli/src/test_scheduler.js	17.5% <75%> (+0.55%)	⬆️

---

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 7b0e108...74a3841. Read the comment docs.

[hramezani]

@SimenB thanks,
I rebase my branch with master.
I want to add the test, can you give some example to me?

[SimenB]

I'm somewhat confused that there are no broken tests from your change, to be honest...

Anyways, new tests should be added e.g. here. That test runs this "project" and makes assertions on the output. You should be able to assert that the coverage report is located at the correct place in the output.

[hramezani]

@SimenB, I checked the tests in here.
the runJest return stdout, stderr, ... . there is no output from this function that returns all the output(summary and coverage) continuous.
for example in json reporter printing with --coverage test summary extract from strerr, and whet I get stdout from runJest, it contains summary report only.

How can I get all the output(summary and coverage) ?

[SimenB]

Ah, that might explain it! Can you expand runJest to return it all?

[hramezani]

@SimenB, I checked the runJest function. I think it is a wrapper and stdout and stderr are provided by jest.

[SimenB]

That's correct. But stdout should include the coverage report

[hramezani]

@SimenB , are you waiting for me to including coverage in stdout?

[SimenB]

Either that or some other test showing that the change has the desired effect 🙂

[cpojer]

@hramezani can you help us push this PR over the finish line? Thanks!

[hramezani]

@cpojer, unfortunately, there is no way to test this feature, so I create a test project and install jest with this changes, then I run the tests with --coverage.

[cpojer]

We have a folder called integration_tests which has multiple different Jest setups and then uses Jest to run those. We do a lot of tests like this, and yours can be done similarly. Mind checking out that folder and creating a test similar to it?

[hramezani]

@cpojer , yes you right. @SimenB offers me as you in this comment to use integration_tests.
but there is a problem that I explained it in this comment

[SimenB]

Is coverage output to stderr?

[cpojer]

I'm gonna merge this just to get it out of the PR queue. The code changes look fine to me, and we have no existing tests that verify the order atm anyway.

[SimenB]

@hramezani mind sending a PR for an update to the changelog? 🙂

[github-actions]

This pull request has been automatically locked since there has not been any recent activity after it was closed. Please open a new issue for related bugs.
Please note this issue tracker is not a help forum. We recommend using StackOverflow or our discord channel for questions.