-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 213
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
Test report doesn't appear in expected place in GitHub UI #67
Comments
This seems to be a GitHub Actions "feature". More details in mikepenz/action-junit-report#40 and https://gh.neting.ccmunity/t/github-actions-status-checks-created-on-incorrect-check-suite-id/16685 . |
Oh, I see. Thanks for the reply 👍 |
Unfortunately as @lhotari already commented - it's a GitHub "feature". Until it's fixed on GitHub side, the best I can do is to mention it in README. |
Just a quick thought (and sorry if this has been discussed before): Instead of creating a check, couldn't you use the same mechanism that https://github.com/actions/upload-artifact uses (under the assumption that you can upload other file types than This would solve the problem in this issue. It would also solve the problem that this action requires the I understand that this change would (most likely) worsen the UX of this action - but on the other hand, I'd argue that you don't need to view the test report that often (usually only if some test has failed), so this change could be ok. |
This also happen when you have a schedule trigger workflow. |
Github seems to have a bug where test reports are not always associated with their build. As an attempt to work around this, I'm removing the reporting workflow and adding the reports as a step in the build. The expected consequence is that we will no longer get test reports on pull requests, but that's an acceptable tradeoff to not have to run around hunting for the reports after a normal push. More info at dorny/test-reporter#67
Github seems to have a bug where test reports are not always associated with their build. As an attempt to work around this, I'm removing the reporting workflow and adding the reports as a step in the build. The expected consequence is that we will no longer get test reports on pull requests, but that's an acceptable tradeoff to not have to run around hunting for the reports after a normal push. More info at dorny/test-reporter#67
…report generation for pull requests (repo-local PRs are preceded by normal build events that will generate the report)
Maybe the new job summary (https://github.blog/2022-05-09-supercharging-github-actions-with-job-summaries/) can be used to:
|
I see that there is a PR to add the "job summary" feature to an unofficial fork of this action: phoenix-actions/test-reporting#21 |
Changelog - enable graphical test results for Scalatest tests like we have for [stdlib tests](https://github.com/enso-org/enso/actions/runs/3180677675/jobs/5184855484) # Important Notes Sometimes the report is created on a different workflow, like [here](https://github.com/enso-org/enso/actions/runs/3196147595/jobs/5217691808). Turned out it is a [known](dorny/test-reporter#67) issue in GitHub Actions https://github.com/orgs/community/discussions/24616
The same issue for me |
+1 for option to publish as job summary, instead of check |
+1 for option to publish as job summary, instead of check |
can we get the 'Check run HTML' URL as output of this report?? |
+1 for option to publish as job summary, instead of check |
otherwise the test results workflow may attach the report to the wrong workflow see dorny/test-reporter#67
otherwise the test results workflow may attach the report to the wrong workflow see dorny/test-reporter#67
…199) * CodeQL - Remove pull_request trigger * Dependabot - check for .net and GH action updates weekly * workflows - run codeql & adr after dotnet workflow on main otherwise the test results workflow may attach the report to the wrong workflow see dorny/test-reporter#67
- NOTE: the report step will not always be attached to the test workflow - it may be attached to golangci-lint see: dorny/test-reporter#67 https://github.com/orgs/community/discussions/24616
- NOTE: the report step will not always be attached to the test workflow - it may be attached to golangci-lint see: dorny/test-reporter#67 https://github.com/orgs/community/discussions/24616 a fork of this dorny/test-reporter has a solution at: phoenix-actions/test-reporting#21
- Since we don't yet have SDLC pipeline projects for Go libraries or for public projects, add in some limited CI validation for PRs to this repo including: * A build and test stage that generates binaries with the Makefile *and* runs make test-coverage to produce coverage (not currently used in CI) Also uploads these as artifacts * Linting through the golangci-lint Github Action - NOTE: intially use dorny/test-reporter which produces Github checks, which by design doesn't always attach to the right workflow - results may show up with golangci-lint. See dorny/test-reporter#67 https://github.com/orgs/community/discussions/24616 To resolve this, switch to a fork that uses summary instead: phoenix-actions/test-reporting#21
+1 for option to publish as job summary, instead of check |
Job summaries are already used on main. We just need a new release. |
@timcassell Do you know when a new release is going to be cut? We're looking forward to this fix. |
No clue, I'm not a maintainer. |
@jozefizso or @ritchxu, would one of you feel comfortable publishing a new release? |
😕 Unfortunately I can't publish new releases due to lack of permissions, will defer to @jozefizso |
Any updates regarding the new release? |
@jozefizso / @dorny Could we cut a new release to resolve this issue? |
@jb-2020 you can always use the action using its commit hash. |
Unfortunately, we're on GHES with self-imposed controls around actions from the Public marketplace and we only fork a single commit from tags/releases. I'll bring this up internally though, thanks! |
@jb-2020 Are there any news regarding a release ? |
@griessej I'm not a maintainer and haven't heard any updates here. I would love to see a new release cut! |
Hi,
thanks a lot for this Action 👍
We currently have multiple GitHub Actions Workflows (
main.yaml
,lint-yaml.yaml
etc ).When using the action inside of the
main.yaml
, the test results appear under thelint-yaml
results 🤔Not 100% sure what is causing it
our step, within
main.yaml
looks likeHere is a (sanitized) output of the step :
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: