fix(ci): generate the coverage files Codecov uploads expect#4649
Merged
Conversation
Phase 1 (apache#4646) wired the upload steps but the underlying tools were not configured to actually write the report files Codecov looks for, so the scala and frontend uploads landed at "0 coverage files to report" and only python and agent-service flags reached Codecov. frontend/karma.conf.js: - Add 'coverage' to the explicit reporters list. Without it, ng's --code-coverage flag does not pull in the karma-coverage reporter because the user-supplied reporters override Angular's defaults. - Add an explicit coverageReporter writing lcovonly to frontend/coverage/lcov.info (the path the Codecov upload step globs). build.sbt: - Set ThisBuild / jacocoReportSettings to enable the XML formatter alongside the default HTML so sbt-jacoco emits jacoco.xml under each module's target/scala-2.13/jacoco/report/ (the path the Codecov upload step globs). Follow-up to apache#4646 / apache#4645. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
github-actions
Bot
added
dependencies
Yicong-Huang
added
the
release/v1.1.0-incubating
Codecov Report✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests. Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #4649 +/- ##
=======================================
Coverage ? 37.20%
Complexity ? 2072
=======================================
Files ? 836
Lines ? 27775
Branches ? 3852
=======================================
Hits ? 10335
Misses ? 16655
Partials ? 785
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more. ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. 🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
|
This was referenced May 2, 2026
Closed
The previous commit used class names that do not exist in sbt-jacoco 3.5.0 (`ScalaHTMLReport`, `XMLReport`) and scoped the setting to `ThisBuild`, which the plugin's project-scoped default overrides. Use the published `JacocoReportFormats.ScalaHTML` / `.XML` constants and bundle the override into `asfLicensingSettings` so every module picks it up, producing `target/scala-2.13/jacoco/report/jacoco.xml` for the Codecov upload glob. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Yicong-Huang
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
May 2, 2026
…ks run (#4654) ### What changes were proposed in this PR? Close `.github/labeler.yml` gaps where root-level / workflow-adjacent config files matched no rule that maps to a CI stack: **Scala build / lint config → `service` label** (so the scala stack runs): - `build.sbt` (root) - `project/**` (sbt build sources, `plugins.sbt`) - `.scalafix.conf` (moved to root by #3888) - `.scalafmt.conf` Today these match either `**/build.sbt` (label `dependencies`, which `LABEL_STACKS` from #4640 maps to no-op) or no rule at all. A PR that only edits one of them skipped the scala stack — concrete example: PR #4649, labels `dependencies, fix, frontend, release/v1.1.0-incubating`, union `{frontend}`, no scala. `service` already maps to scala in `LABEL_STACKS`, so the union picks up scala automatically. **Workflow-adjacent / repo-wide config → `ci` label** (so the full matrix runs): - `.github/scripts/**` (CI helper scripts) - `.github/labeler.yml` (the labeler config itself) - `.asf.yaml` (branch protection rulesets, mailing list, GitHub features) These currently match no rule. `ci` already maps to all four stacks, which is the right gate for changes that can affect every stack. ### Any related issues, documentation, discussions? Closes #4653. ### How was this PR tested? This PR's own labeler run picks up `ci` (it edits `.github/labeler.yml`), so all stacks gate the change. After merge, future PRs that only edit a root scala build file pick up `service`, and PRs editing `.github/scripts/**`, `.github/labeler.yml`, or `.asf.yaml` pick up `ci`. ### Was this PR authored or co-authored using generative AI tooling? Generated-by: Claude Opus 4.7
github-actions Bot
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
May 2, 2026
…ks run (#4654) ### What changes were proposed in this PR? Close `.github/labeler.yml` gaps where root-level / workflow-adjacent config files matched no rule that maps to a CI stack: **Scala build / lint config → `service` label** (so the scala stack runs): - `build.sbt` (root) - `project/**` (sbt build sources, `plugins.sbt`) - `.scalafix.conf` (moved to root by #3888) - `.scalafmt.conf` Today these match either `**/build.sbt` (label `dependencies`, which `LABEL_STACKS` from #4640 maps to no-op) or no rule at all. A PR that only edits one of them skipped the scala stack — concrete example: PR #4649, labels `dependencies, fix, frontend, release/v1.1.0-incubating`, union `{frontend}`, no scala. `service` already maps to scala in `LABEL_STACKS`, so the union picks up scala automatically. **Workflow-adjacent / repo-wide config → `ci` label** (so the full matrix runs): - `.github/scripts/**` (CI helper scripts) - `.github/labeler.yml` (the labeler config itself) - `.asf.yaml` (branch protection rulesets, mailing list, GitHub features) These currently match no rule. `ci` already maps to all four stacks, which is the right gate for changes that can affect every stack. ### Any related issues, documentation, discussions? Closes #4653. ### How was this PR tested? This PR's own labeler run picks up `ci` (it edits `.github/labeler.yml`), so all stacks gate the change. After merge, future PRs that only edit a root scala build file pick up `service`, and PRs editing `.github/scripts/**`, `.github/labeler.yml`, or `.asf.yaml` pick up `ci`. ### Was this PR authored or co-authored using generative AI tooling? Generated-by: Claude Opus 4.7 (backported from commit 5c7dac8)
aglinxinyuan
reviewed
May 2, 2026
github-actions Bot
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
May 2, 2026
### What changes were proposed in this PR? Follow-up to #4646. The upload steps wired in that PR for the scala and frontend stacks have been silently uploading nothing (`Found 0 coverage files to report` in the Codecov action logs); only `python` and `agent-service` flags reach Codecov today. Reason: the underlying tools were not configured to write the report files at the paths the upload globs expected. `frontend/karma.conf.js`: - Add `"coverage"` to the explicit `reporters` list. Without this, Angular's `--code-coverage` flag cannot inject the `karma-coverage` reporter because the user-supplied `reporters` array overrides Angular's defaults. - Add an explicit `coverageReporter` block writing `lcovonly` to `frontend/coverage/lcov.info` — the path the Codecov upload step globs (`./frontend/coverage/**/lcov.info`). `build.sbt`: - Set `ThisBuild / jacocoReportSettings` to use both `ScalaHTMLReport()` and `XMLReport(encoding = "utf-8")`. By default `sbt-jacoco` emits only HTML; without XML there is nothing for Codecov to read at `<module>/target/scala-2.13/jacoco/report/jacoco.xml`. ### Any related issues, documentation, discussions? Follow-up to #4646. Original tracking issue: #4645. ### How was this PR tested? Will be exercised by this PR's own scala and frontend matrices on CI. Expected post-fix behaviour: both flags appear at https://app.codecov.io/gh/apache/texera (currently only `python` and `agent-service` are listed) and per-stack coverage shows up on PR commits. ### Was this PR authored or co-authored using generative AI tooling? Generated-by: Claude Opus 4.7 (backported from commit 69f3aea)
This file contains hidden or 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
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
3 participants
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.
What changes were proposed in this PR?
Follow-up to #4646. The upload steps wired in that PR for the scala and frontend stacks have been silently uploading nothing (
Found 0 coverage files to reportin the Codecov action logs); onlypythonandagent-serviceflags reach Codecov today. Reason: the underlying tools were not configured to write the report files at the paths the upload globs expected.frontend/karma.conf.js:"coverage"to the explicitreporterslist. Without this, Angular's--code-coverageflag cannot inject thekarma-coveragereporter because the user-suppliedreportersarray overrides Angular's defaults.coverageReporterblock writinglcovonlytofrontend/coverage/lcov.info— the path the Codecov upload step globs (./frontend/coverage/**/lcov.info).build.sbt:ThisBuild / jacocoReportSettingsto use bothScalaHTMLReport()andXMLReport(encoding = "utf-8"). By defaultsbt-jacocoemits only HTML; without XML there is nothing for Codecov to read at<module>/target/scala-2.13/jacoco/report/jacoco.xml.Any related issues, documentation, discussions?
Follow-up to #4646. Original tracking issue: #4645.
How was this PR tested?
Will be exercised by this PR's own scala and frontend matrices on CI. Expected post-fix behaviour: both flags appear at https://app.codecov.io/gh/apache/texera (currently only
pythonandagent-serviceare listed) and per-stack coverage shows up on PR commits.Was this PR authored or co-authored using generative AI tooling?
Generated-by: Claude Opus 4.7