Jarek Potiuk
Jarek Potiuk
> thoughts ? This is a valid option if someone wants it, all it needs is someone to PR it.
This is not likely to succeed.. The nature of tests we have - where we gather coverage and combine them from separate runs is such that every single run will...
This is nice. I like the idea that we are focusing on coverage of particular test files - because since we are doing selective tests, this is the only way...
> This can also happen in a separate PR, WDYT? Yes. If we just do for information only - I think now failing the CI tests for users is too...
I looked a bit closer ... And unfortunately I think there are few problems: 1) Currenlty seems that test failures are ignored (so when pytest exits with error, the script...
One more thing. I think I right now - the "upload-coverage" is not used by the test - at all from what I see. And the thing is - it...
> We only upload coverage when the tests were run on the main branch. Right.. Stupid me. I missed that we have if in the `codecov` action :)
BTW. The error code from `pytest` is still not propagated to exit code of the test script: This test is failing at the impersonation - but the result of each...
This is what you see when you unfold the `Core` folded test results now - and the impersonation test is still failng in a number of the tests (but the...
Yeah. That's what I was afraid - the impersonation test fail in ALL tests now :)