Closed gforcada closed 7 years ago
@gforcada the rationale behind this is that you don't want to run the expensive coverage if a test fails. There is always a tradeoff between fast failure and total execution time.
Yes I know, but given that the package if small is a bit silly to run them twice just for the sake of it.
As it is on CI I consider that OK, locally you can still run tests without coverage.
Running the coverage report already runs the tests.