2017-01-26 18:19:35 +08:00
|
|
|
coverage:
|
|
|
|
|
precision: 2
|
|
|
|
|
round: nearest
|
2017-02-08 10:25:38 +08:00
|
|
|
range: 60...90
|
|
|
|
|
status:
|
|
|
|
|
project:
|
2020-08-20 22:43:24 +08:00
|
|
|
default:
|
2024-10-07 14:24:22 +08:00
|
|
|
threshold: 2.0%
|
2017-01-26 18:19:35 +08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ignore:
|
|
|
|
|
- lib/spack/spack/test/.*
|
|
|
|
|
- lib/spack/docs/.*
|
|
|
|
|
- lib/spack/external/.*
|
2019-07-03 16:56:13 +08:00
|
|
|
- share/spack/qa/.*
|
2017-01-26 18:21:26 +08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
comment: off
|
2021-06-18 02:22:23 +08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
# Inline codecov annotations make the code hard to read, and they add
|
|
|
|
|
# annotations in files that seemingly have nothing to do with the PR.
|
|
|
|
|
github_checks:
|
|
|
|
|
annotations: false
|
2021-08-06 16:33:12 +08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
# Attempt to fix "Missing base commit" messages in the codecov UI.
|
|
|
|
|
# Because we do not run full tests on package PRs, package PRs' merge
|
|
|
|
|
# commits on `develop` don't have coverage info. It appears that
|
|
|
|
|
# codecov will give you an error if the pseudo-base's coverage data
|
|
|
|
|
# doesn't all apply properly to the real PR base.
|
|
|
|
|
#
|
|
|
|
|
# See here for docs:
|
|
|
|
|
# https://docs.codecov.com/docs/comparing-commits#pseudo-comparison
|
|
|
|
|
# See here for another potential solution:
|
|
|
|
|
# https://community.codecov.com/t/2480/15
|
|
|
|
|
codecov:
|
|
|
|
|
allow_coverage_offsets: true
|
