[ECO-4852] Gather spec items coverage information #1811
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
VeskeR
force-pushed
the
ECO-4852/gather-spec-items-coverage
branch
from
0f52e40 to
1f5d217
Compare
github-actions
bot
temporarily deployed
to
staging/pull/1811/bundle-report
VeskeR
force-pushed
the
uts-logs
branch
2 times, most recently
from
fe3f050 to
657e484
Compare
VeskeR
force-pushed
the
ECO-4852/gather-spec-items-coverage
branch
from
1f5d217 to
15cc149
Compare
github-actions
bot
temporarily deployed
to
staging/pull/1811/bundle-report
VeskeR
force-pushed
the
ECO-4852/gather-spec-items-coverage
branch
from
15cc149 to
ef29ffb
Compare
github-actions
bot
temporarily deployed
to
staging/pull/1811/bundle-report
VeskeR
force-pushed
the
ECO-4852/gather-spec-items-coverage
branch
from
ef29ffb to
8eb3a75
Compare
github-actions
bot
temporarily deployed
to
staging/pull/1811/bundle-report
VeskeR
force-pushed
the
ECO-4852/gather-spec-items-coverage
branch
from
8eb3a75 to
0d7e54e
Compare
github-actions
bot
temporarily deployed
to
staging/pull/1811/bundle-report
VeskeR
force-pushed
the
ECO-4852/gather-spec-items-coverage
branch
from
0d7e54e to
595ab00
Compare
github-actions
bot
temporarily deployed
to
staging/pull/1811/bundle-report
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think this is a great start. I do have some concerns about how we're trying to apply heuristics in order to get around the fact that the spec, as currently written, doesn't allow us to gather great data about how much of it a given test suite implements. I think I’d prefer that we not try and hide these limitations, and then work on improving the spec.
`dox` is missing type declaration files in its bundle, and no types are available at `@types/dox`. However, the repository for the package has the `index.d.ts` file available [1], but it wasn't published to npm. So I just copied `index.d.ts` from the repo to our codebase for type definitions. [1] https://github.com/tj/dox/blob/master/index.d.ts
VeskeR
force-pushed
the
ECO-4852/gather-spec-items-coverage
branch
from
595ab00 to
a5824bb
Compare
github-actions
bot
temporarily deployed
to
staging/pull/1811/bundle-report
Stop using arbitrary weight formula for test tags contribution towards spec coverage. Instead, display amount of tests with full coverage for a spec item, and amount of tests with partial coverage. Do not make an assumption in the script about what spec items should be explicitly tested or not regarding parent/children spec items. Instead provide a report for each spec item individually. This could be improved in the future once the spec document is accompanied with some metadata about the intended way of testing certain spec items.
lawrence-forooghian
approved these changes
Jul 8, 2024
ttypic
reviewed
Jul 9, 2024
ttypic
approved these changes
Jul 17, 2024
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This PR is based on #1806, please review that one first.
This PR introduces new
specCoverageReport.tsscript to gather spec items coverage by ably-js tests (from docstring tags) and compare them with the Ably features specification.Script fetches the latest spec from Ably specification repo using link to the textile file: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/ably/specification/main/textile/features.textile. Then parses textile file and docstrings in ably-js tests to output spec item coverage table.
This PR also adds new
Spec coverage reportworkflow, which simply runsnpm run speccoveragereportto output spec coverage report. See job output here.Here's the unformatted spec coverage data gathered based on test suite state for a1229af commit:
spec-coverage-result.json