-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 9
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 test_pr
for testing PRs
#137
Conversation
Codecov ReportAttention: Patch coverage is
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #137 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 55.98% 53.46% -2.53%
==========================================
Files 25 26 +1
Lines 1145 1199 +54
==========================================
Hits 641 641
- Misses 504 558 +54 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
Another idea worth thinking about is adding more information about the server process to the transport file, so that quarto can automatically restart the process if this information doesn't match. Currently, the transport file is "dumb" as it just has the port, pid and key, so it will be reused without question (a new one just will be started if the existing one doesn't answer in reasonable time). |
Obviously kind of brittle if anything upstream changes, but should make it a bit more straightforward to be able confirm fixes. I've just matched the cache paths for each platform based on what quarto itself is doing. |
At least it's likely that if anybody breaks that specific code upstream, it's going to be us. |
From #136 it's clearly difficult to correctly setup
quarto
to correctly run the backend using a particular PR's branch so that we can more easily have people verify that a fix is correct. This helper aims to make that much simpler.@jkrumbiegel I'm not 100% sure that
--no-execute-daemon
is having the intended effect on reruns, see the below outputs. In particular the differences between theTransport file
logs, the first of which I'd expect, but the second one is saying it is reusing the server, even though--no-execute-daemon
flag is passed. Any idea what's happening there?