usethis icon indicating copy to clipboard operation
usethis copied to clipboard

How to update badges

Open jennybc opened this issue 2 years ago • 2 comments

The recommended badge snippet for GHA and Codecov has changed over time.

The dev version of usethis produces badges that match what GitHub's and Codecov's official badge helpers provide now.

If you have old badge syntax (which still seems to work, BTW), but you want to update, here's how.

Note that the Codecov badge update will be prompted by urlchecker::url_check(), i.e. you're going to have to do this one anyway, eventually.


This is a little fiddly, given how low impact it is. Our current/old badges do work, at least for the moment. But here's the deal anyway.

Reasons to update badges:

  • Part of finishing master --> main.
  • Use the URLs returned by GitHub's and Codecov's own official badge helpers / docs.

This requires dev usethis. The GHA update in question happened in https://github.com/r-lib/usethis/commit/aa510ec8d4d511ad74ecb15b63ab14febcdfa27c.

Pick one, to update GHA R-CMD-check badge:

  • use_tidy_github_actions() inserts an updated GHA badge in README, while doing its main job.
  • use_github_actions_badge("R-CMD-check") just inserts a badge.

To update a Codecov badge, you have to call an internal helper via ::::

  • usethis:::use_codecov_badge("OWNER/SPEC"), e.g. usethis:::use_codecov_badge("r-lib/gh")

Before committing new badges:

  • If this resulted in 2 badges in README.[R]?md, delete the old. Move the new into desired place.
  • Re-render README.Rmd with devtools::build_readme().

R-CMD-check badge: Old svg: ...OWNER/REPO/workflows/R-CMD-check/badge.svg New svg: ...OWNER/REPO/actions/workflows/R-CMD-check.yaml/badge.svg Old URL: ...OWNER/REPO/actions New URL: ...OWNER/REPO/actions/workflows/R-CMD-check.yaml

Codecov test coverage badge: Old svg: probably mentions master New svg: probably should mention main Old URL: https://codecov.io/gh/OWNER/REPO?branch=master New URL: https://app.codecov.io/gh/OWNER/REPO?branch=main

jennybc avatar Feb 28 '22 19:02 jennybc

Should we wait on #1554 before doing this systematically?

hadley avatar Mar 01 '22 20:03 hadley

Sure. I don't see any urgency around this. (Although I have been doing it whenever I work on a package.)

jennybc avatar Mar 01 '22 20:03 jennybc