Open melanieclarke opened 3 weeks ago
@tapastro - based on similar changes for romancal, I think this is what's needed to update our okify script when we're ready to move over to GitHub Actions.
I tested by starting an okify run and it found the artifacts appropriately, but didn't try actually okifying anything.
Attention: Patch coverage is 40.00000%
with 3 lines
in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
Project coverage is 60.83%. Comparing base (
8381a26
) to head (ae3074d
). Report is 4 commits behind head on master.
Files with missing lines | Patch % | Lines |
---|---|---|
jwst/scripts/okify_regtests.py | 40.00% | 3 Missing :warning: |
:umbrella: View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
:loudspeaker: Have feedback on the report? Share it here.
this raises the question; should we move the okify
script to a common upstream between jwst
and romancal
, so that underlying infrastructure changes are easier to make?
There are currently some other differences between the two scripts, but we could probably come to an agreement on which version is preferable. I'm all in favor of de-duplicating the code.
Update the okify script to look for regression test artifacts from GitHub Actions instead of Jenkins
Checklist for PR authors (skip items if you don't have permissions or they are not applicable)
CHANGES.rst
within the relevant release section~