Switch to GitHub Actions and CodeCov #104
Conversation
do we still care about codacy?
|
This is ready for review. In reviewing, note that the files Also in here: added Python 3.9 to the test matrix and dropped uploading of coverage to Codacy, because it seemed to be having a lot of trouble (are we actually using Codacy for anything? We can probably also drop that badge; I only pay attention to CodeClimate's feedback. I added the extra badge there because otherwise CodeClimate was on its own line; now it gets to share with Binder, too!). Additionally, I moved the Binder badge to the left of that line. The two things you're most likely to click on, docs and Binder, are at the leftmost edge. I'd be interested in switching from Coveralls to CodeCov for coverage info, and can do that in this PR if it makes sense to. I switched to CodeCov on OpenPathSampling CLI and on CodeModel, will probably switch OPS over when I switch from Travis, too. I've never liked the aesthetic of Coveralls, and now CodeCov handles parallel builds reasonably well. (Only issue is that it thinks scheduled/cron builds are more parallel results coming in, so maybe don't upload coverage for those.) |
|
LGTM, I like all the nice checkmarks for GA. Feel free to merge.
Splitting it out to a seperate PR might make for cleaner release notes? If so, that option has my preference +0.5 ? |
I just noticed that coveralls isn't reporting back in the checks (apparently I need to do something to tell it to stop awaiting completion?), so I think it may be better to switch to codecov here. |
dwhswenson
changed the title
I don't see code-cov reporting back either? Or am I looking at the wrong place (I expected it to be somewhere in the |
I think it waits until everything is done, so it is still waiting on AppVeyor. At the link under the action for it, I see:
|
|
Nope... apparently not. I was trying to use the Action for it; I'll use the script instead (which is what I did elsewhere) |
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #104 +/- ##
=========================================
Coverage ? 99.51%
=========================================
Files ? 12
Lines ? 1033
Branches ? 0
=========================================
Hits ? 1028
Misses ? 5
Partials ? 0 Continue to review full report at Codecov.
|
|
It didn't show up in checks because I needed to give it permission on GitHub (which I did after the commits completed). Obviously it now knows how to talk to us, though! |
Looks like it! Feel free to merge! |
Resolves #103.
I think I've got Autorelease working on GitHub Actions now. There may be a few more bumps along the way, but with releases done for Autorelease, CodeModel, and OpenPathSampling CLI, I think this workflow is ready for Contact Map Explorer (and then OPS).
Autorelease has partial support for Azure pipelines, but unfortunately you can't identify the target branch at pipeline planning time, so you always show the (usually skipped) testpypi deployment stage. With Actions, it only shows when it runs.
Autorelease action scripts are vendored with
autorelease vendor actions, and can be updated with the same.