search

f-meloni / danger-swift-coverage

Show the coverage of the modified/created files on your PRs.
MIT License
85 stars 20 forks source link

`danger-swift local` works fine but not `danger-swift ci` (GH Actions) #32

Closed michaelhenry closed 2 years ago

michaelhenry commented 2 years ago

using danger-swift local able to generate code coverage from stdout.

## Messages
Project coverage: 15.88%
-
Project coverage: 15.88%
## Markdowns
## AppTests.xctest: Coverage: 100.0
| File | Coverage ||
| --- | --- | --- |
AppTests.swift | 100.0% | ✅

-
## TodosTests.xctest: Coverage: 100.0
| File | Coverage ||
| --- | --- | --- |
TodosTests.swift | 100.0% | ✅

-
## Core.framework: Coverage: 0.0
| File | Coverage ||
| --- | --- | --- |
Core.swift | 0.0% | ⚠️

-
## App.app: Coverage: 70.97
| File | Coverage ||
| --- | --- | --- |
AppDelegate.swift | 94.74% | ✅
ViewController.swift | 33.33% | ⚠️

-
## Todos.framework: Coverage: 75.17
| File | Coverage ||
| --- | --- | --- |
Todo.swift | 18.97% | ⚠️
Todos.swift | 89.47% | ✅

but pushing the same code to the origin (with GitHub actions) running danger-swift ci doesn't produce any output. I even also tried to push the same .xcresult to verify the ci, but still the same. Any recommendation? thank you

michaelhenry commented 2 years ago

my bad, i have compared the local vs ci rather than checking the created/modified files.