feat: make newfiles part of files behaviour #573
Conversation
Codecov ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅
✅ All tests successful. No failed tests found. @@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #573 +/- ##
=======================================
Coverage 97.49% 97.50%
=======================================
Files 414 414
Lines 34986 35002 +16
=======================================
+ Hits 34109 34127 +18
+ Misses 877 875 -2
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.
|
Codecov ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅ ✅ All tests successful. No failed tests found. @@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #573 +/- ##
=======================================
Coverage 97.49% 97.50%
=======================================
Files 414 414
Lines 34986 35002 +16
=======================================
+ Hits 34109 34127 +18
+ Misses 877 875 -2
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.
|
Codecov ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅
✅ All tests successful. No failed tests found. @@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #573 +/- ##
=======================================
Coverage 97.49% 97.50%
=======================================
Files 414 414
Lines 34986 35002 +16
=======================================
+ Hits 34109 34127 +18
+ Misses 877 875 -2
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.
|
Codecov ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅
Changes have been made to critical files, which contain lines commonly executed in production. Learn more ✅ All tests successful. No failed tests found. Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #573 +/- ##
=======================================
Coverage 97.54% 97.55%
=======================================
Files 449 449
Lines 36192 36208 +16
=======================================
+ Hits 35303 35321 +18
+ Misses 889 887 -2
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.
... and 2 files with indirect coverage changes This change has been scanned for critical changes. Learn more |
| @@ -275,6 +275,14 @@ def get_upper_section_names(self, settings): | |||
| if all(x not in sections for x in headers): | |||
| sections.insert(0, "condensed_header") | |||
|
|
|||
| print(sections) | |||
| and "newfiles" not in sections | ||
| and "condensed_files" not in sections | ||
| ): | ||
| sections.insert(0, "newfiles") |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
so we're gonna show "files" AND "newfiles" ?...
The question is: do we pop the "files" entry anywhere?
Like instead of this if can we do sections.replace("files", "condensed_files") ?
Also let's prefer condensed_files instead of new_files cause that's not new anymore
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We indeed want to show both if files has been selected.
If a user specifies the files formatting in their comment layout config, we want it to show the newfiles formatting as well.
this commit fixes a previously erroneous commit that attempted to make it so if "files" or "tree" are mentioned in the comment layout config then the condensed_files section is also included. We want the behaviour if "files" is selected in the config to be: 1. always show the files section 2 if there are missing lines in the path then also show the condensed_files section
joseph-sentry
force-pushed
the
joseph/newfiles
branch
from
af497fb
to
69639d9
Compare
If a user specifies the files formatting in their comment layout config, we want it to show the newfiles formatting as well.
Closes: codecov/engineering-team#1129