CI refactoring, test coverage data gathering and reports generation.

[shimkiv]

• This PR attempts to generalize the complex scripts usage by wrapping them with the Makefile.
  • This will make it impossible to run make command on Windows natively (not sure though if we have users who build stuff on Windows without the WSL).
  • Should we create the Windows CMD/Powershell scripts to emulate some Make targets?
• CI is updated accordingly to use the Makefile.
  • We need to decide how we want to run tests with code coverage data gathering and reporting. Please refer to internal discussion.
• Formatting applied against the root .md files.
  • More information and usage examples will be added as part of the followup tasks.
• Codecov and current repository are configured for coverage reports uploading.

---

Tasks left:

• Run it for one specific Rust version only (no reason to do it for whole the matrix).
  • Conditionally run make nextest-with-coverage for one of the rust_toolchain_version: ["1.71", "1.72", "1.73", "1.74"].
  • Extract the make nextest-heavy-with-coverage into Nightly builds with on-demand execution option.
• Document changes and usage options in CONTRIBUTING.md.
  • CARGO_EXTRA_ARGS="-p poly-commitment" make test-all-with-coverage
  • BIN_EXTRA_ARGS="-p poly-commitment" make nextest-all-with-coverage

[dannywillems]

Should we create the Windows CMD/Powershell scripts to emulate some Make targets?

No, we should not. It is fine for now, IMO.

[dannywillems]

LGTM so far. Feel free to continue with the tasks left.
I tested a few make targets.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 73.18%. Comparing base (efbfd56) to head (68de23a).
Report is 80 commits behind head on master.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #2504      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   73.17%   73.18%   +0.01%     
==========================================
  Files         233      233              
  Lines       53846    53885      +39     
==========================================
+ Hits        39401    39437      +36     
- Misses      14445    14448       +3     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[dannywillems]

Already approving as it seems it is only related to the linter now.

[shimkiv]

Hey folks,
let's iterate over this changes later to see if we can improve PR checks timing.

[dannywillems]

Hey folks, let's iterate over this changes later to see if we can improve PR checks timing.

Agree.

[volhovm]

@shimkiv is it possible to get this into compatible too?

[shimkiv]

@volhovm everything is possible, I'm just thinking which changes you'd like to have in compatible? If we are talking about "quality-of-live" changes only - then no problem. But if you were also thinking to have code coverage uploading to the Codecov service - here we might start to have issues.
Codecov is configured to consider master as default/main branch it will compare coverage against for diff reports. And if compatible is different to main (master) by design, then you might end up with constant "failed" jobs on CI side (unless such comparison will be intentionally disabled).

[volhovm]

^ (discussed yesterday in PM, but copying): I'd ideally like to see the CI files/Makefile structure synchronized between this repo's master and develop, because rn develop is outdated, a bit broken, and I'm not sure if it makes sense to invest in repairing it if you just wrote a new-and-beautiful CI thing which can override the old-and-boring CI thing :)