-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 57
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 coverage_report target #1058
Conversation
bec6ba3
to
258a07b
Compare
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.
👍
4556636
to
388948b
Compare
Codecov ReportAttention:
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## develop #1058 +/- ##
============================================
+ Coverage 34.55% 54.10% +19.55%
============================================
Files 161 187 +26
Lines 8257 9942 +1685
Branches 4851 5283 +432
============================================
+ Hits 2853 5379 +2526
- Misses 2822 3561 +739
+ Partials 2582 1002 -1580 ☔ 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.
Very nice! Thank you for fixing codecov report 🚀 🥇
f484c47
to
2eb9139
Compare
Reusing the same
CodeCoverage.cmake
as in XRPLF/rippled#4849NOTE This PR should be only merged by someone with administrative access to the repo, since it makes use of
secrets.CODECOV_TOKEN
. If I understand github workflows correctly, a commit (merge) made by someone without access to repo secrets would result in this change not having this access either, which will lead to spurious failures of codecov integration