Add full-junit-result to Fladle

[bootstraponline]

runningcode/fladle#157

[adamfilipow92]

If I fully understand.

If we want to use smart-flank we need to have enabled one of the options

1. full-junit-result
2. legacy-junit-result

WIthout one of that smart-flank not working
My proposal is

1. Fix legacy-junit-result flag 947
2. Add fast fail when smart-flank enabled but any of junit command not set with clearly explain what to do.
3. Add docs about using smart-flank mentioned here 902

WDYT?
@bootstraponline @jan-gogo @Pasterzp @piotradamczyk5 @Sloox

[bootstraponline]

@adamfilipow92 I think that makes sense!

Do we know why smart flank requires those junit options? I think we just need the timing info from a complete run.

[bootstraponline]

https://github.com/Flank/flank/blob/master/docs/smart_flank.md is the information we have documented about smart flank.

[adamfilipow92]

@adamfilipow92 I think that makes sense!

Do we know why smart flank requires those junit options? I think we just need the timing info from a complete run.

In JUnitResult we remove fail nodes if any success #798 and I think there can be a problem but I need to more investigate it to be 100% sure.

[bootstraponline]

In JUnitResult we remove fail nodes if any success #798 and I think there can be a problem but I need to more investigate it to be 100% sure.

I think smart flank ignores failed nodes though (as specified in the smart flank doc).

[adamfilipow92]

Hmmm, true, smart flank using only passed tests. I analyzed where is the problem. When we did not set legacy/full junit flag, flank not uploading smart-flank report. I tested https://github.com/Flank/flank/pull/935/files and this fixes the problem.

[adamfilipow92]

For now, we can run smart flank without set --full-junit-result and --legacy-junit-result but if we use FullJUnitResult in gcs path and current run don't have set flag --full-junit-result flank override full junit result by junit result it's can be little confusing. I add fast fail to verify if we use the same type of JUnit result in this pr: #1056. After merging #1057 I think we can close this issue because of all of the points from here are done.

WDYT?
@bootstraponline

[bootstraponline]

sounds good!

[adamfilipow92]

Closed because all points from #936 (comment) done