esgf2-us / metagrid

ESGF Search UI
https://metagrid.readthedocs.io/en/latest/
MIT License
16 stars 4 forks source link

Feature/558 transfer logging #590

Closed sashakames closed 7 months ago

sashakames commented 8 months ago

Description

Fixes # (issue)

Type of change

How Has This Been Tested?

Checklist

codecov-commenter commented 7 months ago

Codecov Report

Attention: 2 lines in your changes are missing coverage. Please review.

Comparison is base (644bbb1) 98.50% compared to head (12e997f) 98.54%.

Files Patch % Lines
frontend/src/components/Globus/DatasetDownload.tsx 33.33% 2 Missing :warning:
Additional details and impacted files ```diff @@ Coverage Diff @@ ## v1.1.0 #590 +/- ## ========================================== + Coverage 98.50% 98.54% +0.03% ========================================== Files 76 76 Lines 2738 2744 +6 Branches 415 416 +1 ========================================== + Hits 2697 2704 +7 + Misses 41 40 -1 ``` | [Flag](https://app.codecov.io/gh/esgf2-us/metagrid/pull/590/flags?src=pr&el=flags&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=esgf2-us) | Coverage Δ | | |---|---|---| | [backend](https://app.codecov.io/gh/esgf2-us/metagrid/pull/590/flags?src=pr&el=flag&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=esgf2-us) | `100.00% <100.00%> (ø)` | | | [frontend](https://app.codecov.io/gh/esgf2-us/metagrid/pull/590/flags?src=pr&el=flag&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=esgf2-us) | `97.81% <75.00%> (+0.06%)` | :arrow_up: | Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. [Click here](https://docs.codecov.io/docs/carryforward-flags?utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=esgf2-us#carryforward-flags-in-the-pull-request-comment) to find out more.

:umbrella: View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
:loudspeaker: Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

sashakames commented 7 months ago

The codecov/patch looks like a false-positive and the diff is out of whack, I wonder if against master not v1.1.0? So maybe we can merge if the changes look ok @downiec ?

sashakames commented 7 months ago

We reached a conclusion that the coverage issue was ok and should not prevent a merge, IIRC.