Conversation
|
The following accounts have interacted with this PR and/or linked issues. I will continue to update these lists as activity occurs. You can also manually ask me to refresh this list by adding the Core Committers: Use this line as a base for the props when committing in SVN: To understand the WordPress project's expectations around crediting contributors, please review the Contributor Attribution page in the Core Handbook. |
Codecov Report✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests. Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## trunk #355 +/- ##
============================================
- Coverage 53.67% 49.73% -3.94%
Complexity 4410 4410
============================================
Files 298 298
Lines 39424 39424
============================================
- Hits 21161 19609 -1552
- Misses 18263 19815 +1552
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more. ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. 🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
|
Seems to be passing now though for that PR?
|
|
Yeah, the last commit apparently changed the coverage so it wouldn't fail. Here's an example of the run where it did fail https://github.com/WordPress/secure-custom-fields/runs/60370170867 I'm not exactly sure why it differed so much between those two commits. |

Summary
bin/directory from Codecov coverage calculationsThe
bin/directory contains CLI and infrastructure scripts that make HTTP requests to external APIs (GitHub REST/GraphQL). These are integration scripts that are inherently difficult to unit test without extensive HTTP mocking.See #354 as an example - the
codecov/patchcheck passes (confirming the testable parsing logic has coverage), butcodecov/projectfails because the CLI orchestration code inbin/isn't covered.Test plan
bin/files toward project coverage