enforce positive coverage

[akaszynski]

Resolves #1906 by enforcing a diff of 0%, which means that the change in coverage should not go down.

As commented in #1906 (comment), we cannot enforce a positive as some commits may not incur a diff change (e.g. style changes or documentation).

Also updates our codecov upload to use a github action as the bash uploader is deprecated. See:
https://docs.codecov.com/docs/about-the-codecov-bash-uploader

[adeak]

What does "enforce 0%" mean? What is there to enforce about "at least 0% has to be covered"? I'm probably missing the whole point here, but I can't figure it out on my own.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Merging #1993 (1a6a68f) into main (5828416) will not change coverage.
The diff coverage is n/a.

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main    #1993   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   92.99%   92.99%           
=======================================
  Files          74       74           
  Lines       15482    15482           
=======================================
  Hits        14398    14398           
  Misses       1084     1084           

[akaszynski]

What does "enforce 0%" mean? What is there to enforce about "at least 0% has to be covered"? I'm probably missing the whole point here, but I can't figure it out on my own.

I've updated the title and description of the PR to explain it better. I agree that it's not clear.

[adeak]

Ah, I get it now, thanks.

Would it perhaps be possible to distinguish PRs? Maybe based on branch name (ignore doc/*), or labels on github (something like a [no-code] tag that's explicitly exempt from coverage checks)? For bugfixes and new features it would be pretty nice to have some pressure to cover changes.

[akaszynski]

For bugfixes and new features it would be pretty nice to have some pressure to cover changes.

I can enforce patch changes as well. I'm still trying to figure out the yml and it takes a bit of time for the PRs to update, so it might take a bit of time.

[akaszynski]

I've added untested code in 2ceb39b, and codecov reported that the code wasn't tested (which is great in the web interface):

Looks like the checks also work as expected