Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

coverage over time return component ID and name #546

Merged
merged 10 commits into from May 9, 2024
Merged

Conversation

JerrySentry
Copy link
Contributor

@JerrySentry JerrySentry commented May 7, 2024

Have ComponentMeasurements type return both component ID and name, if no name is supplied in the YML file the field will default to the ID.

Legal Boilerplate

Look, I get it. The entity doing business as "Sentry" was incorporated in the State of Delaware in 2015 as Functional Software, Inc. In 2022 this entity acquired Codecov and as result Sentry is going to need some rights from me in order to utilize my contributions in this PR. So here's the deal: I retain all rights, title and interest in and to my contributions, and by keeping this boilerplate intact I confirm that Sentry can use, modify, copy, and redistribute my contributions, under Sentry's choice of terms.

@JerrySentry JerrySentry marked this pull request as ready for review May 7, 2024 16:46
@JerrySentry JerrySentry requested a review from a team as a code owner May 7, 2024 16:46
Copy link

codecov bot commented May 7, 2024

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 98.24561% with 1 lines in your changes are missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 95.78%. Comparing base (3c5f37a) to head (fa14671).

✅ All tests successful. No failed tests found.

Files Patch % Lines
services/components.py 91.66% 1 Missing ⚠️
Additional details and impacted files
@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##            main    #546     +/-   ##
=======================================
- Coverage   95.79   95.78   -0.01     
=======================================
  Files        777     777             
  Lines      17253   17262      +9     
=======================================
+ Hits       16526   16534      +8     
- Misses       727     728      +1     
Flag Coverage Δ
unit 91.52% <98.24%> (-0.01%) ⬇️
unit-latest-uploader 91.52% <98.24%> (-0.01%) ⬇️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

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

@codecov-qa
Copy link

codecov-qa bot commented May 7, 2024

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 98.24561% with 1 lines in your changes are missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 91.52%. Comparing base (3c5f37a) to head (fa14671).

✅ All tests successful. No failed tests found.

Files Patch % Lines
services/components.py 91.66% 1 Missing ⚠️
Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main     #546      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   91.52%   91.52%   -0.01%     
==========================================
  Files         602      602              
  Lines       16397    16406       +9     
==========================================
+ Hits        15007    15015       +8     
- Misses       1390     1391       +1     
Flag Coverage Δ
unit 91.52% <98.24%> (-0.01%) ⬇️
unit-latest-uploader 91.52% <98.24%> (-0.01%) ⬇️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

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

@codecov-notifications
Copy link

codecov-notifications bot commented May 8, 2024

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 98.24561% with 1 lines in your changes are missing coverage. Please review.

✅ All tests successful. No failed tests found.

Files Patch % Lines
services/components.py 91.66% 1 Missing ⚠️

📢 Thoughts on this report? Let us know!

Copy link

codecov-public-qa bot commented May 8, 2024

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 98.24561% with 1 lines in your changes are missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 91.52%. Comparing base (3c5f37a) to head (fa14671).

✅ All tests successful. No failed tests found ☺️

Impacted file tree graph

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main     #546      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   91.52%   91.52%   -0.01%     
==========================================
  Files         602      602              
  Lines       16397    16406       +9     
==========================================
+ Hits        15007    15015       +8     
- Misses       1390     1391       +1     
Flag Coverage Δ
unit 91.52% <98.24%> (-0.01%) ⬇️
unit-latest-uploader 91.52% <98.24%> (-0.01%) ⬇️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

Files Coverage Δ
graphql_api/types/comparison/comparison.py 100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
graphql_api/types/repository/repository.py 100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
services/components.py 98.73% <91.66%> (-1.27%) ⬇️

Impacted file tree graph

@@ -5,6 +5,7 @@ type Component {
}

type ComponentMeasurements {
componentId: String!
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Real change.

components = [
c_id for c_id in components if c_id.component_id in filters["components"]
]
components = [c for c in components if c.component_id in filters["components"]]

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Real change. just rename var name

components_mapping = {
component.component_id: component.name for component in components
}

queried_measurements = [
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Real change.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Dictionary comprehension is pretty neat

@@ -453,6 +482,7 @@ def resolve_component_measurements(
after=after,
before=before,
last_measurement=last_measurements_mapping.get(component_id),
components_mapping=components_mapping,
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Real change.

follow_imports = silent
warn_no_return = False
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Added this new rule to not check implicit return None, not a fan of that.

@@ -80,42 +80,50 @@ def patch_totals(self) -> ReportTotals:
class ComponentMeasurements:
def __init__(
self,
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Mostly real changes on this file


@cached_property
def name(self):
def name(self) -> str:
if self.components_mapping.get(self.component_id):
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

nit: this could be written as

return self.components_mapping.get(self.component_id, self.component_id) right?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Not really because the shared.Components object would always set the name to be empty string if it is not defined (never None). So we would have dicts like:

components_mapping = {
  "Id1": "",
  "Id2": "Name1",
}

using the .get would return the empty string as name now because it found the empty string name value for the ID, but ofc doing if "": returns False

Copy link
Contributor

@ajay-sentry ajay-sentry left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

lgtm

@JerrySentry JerrySentry added this pull request to the merge queue May 9, 2024
Merged via the queue into main with commit dbe28ab May 9, 2024
21 of 22 checks passed
@JerrySentry JerrySentry deleted the may_07_cot branch May 9, 2024 17:24
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

2 participants