This action analyses the coverage data produced by the Python coverage library and produces:
All of this runs on top of GitHub Action without extra-charges and runs on the GitHub infrastructure: your code isn't sent anywhere out of GitHub.
This action operates on an already generated .coverage
file from coverage.
It has two main modes of operation:
On PRs, it will analyze the .coverage
file, and produce a comment that will be posted to the PR. If a comment had already previously be written, it will be updated. The comment contains information on the evolution of coverage rate attributed to this PR, as well as the rate of coverage for lines that this PR introduces. There's also a small analysis for each file in a collapsed block.
This comment will also be output as a job summary.
See an example.
On repository's default branch, it will extract the coverage rate and create files that will be stored on a dedicated independent branch in your repository.
These files include:
svg
badge to include in your READMEjson
file that can be used by shields.io if your repository is public to customize the look of your badgejson
file used internally by the action to report on coverage evolution (does a PR make the coverage go up or down?)See an example
Please ensure that your .coverage
file(s) is created with the option relative_files = true
.
Please ensure that the branch python-coverage-comment-action-data
is not protected (there's no reason that it would be the case, except if you have very specific wildcard rules). If it is, either adjust your rules, or set the COVERAGE_DATA_BRANCH
parameter as described below. GitHub Actions will create this branch with initial data at the first run if it doesn't exist, and will independently commit to that branch after each commit to your default branch.
Once the action has run on your default branch, all the details for how to integrate the badge to your Readme will be displayed in:
python-coverage-comment-action-data
branchThe following snippet is targeted for cases where you expect PRs from users that don't have write access to the repository. Posting the comment is done in 2 steps:
# .github/workflows/ci.yml name: CI on: pull_request: push: branches: - "main" jobs: test: name: Run tests & display coverage runs-on: ubuntu-latest permissions: # Gives the action the necessary permissions for publishing new # comments in pull requests. pull-requests: write # Gives the action the necessary permissions for pushing data to the # python-coverage-comment-action branch, and for editing existing # comments (to avoid publishing multiple comments in the same PR) contents: write steps: - uses: actions/checkout@v4 - name: Install everything, run the tests, produce the .coverage file run: make test # This is the part where you put your own test command - name: Coverage comment id: coverage_comment uses: py-cov-action/python-coverage-comment-action@v3 with: GITHUB_TOKEN: ${{ github.token }} - name: Store Pull Request comment to be posted uses: actions/upload-artifact@v4 if: steps.coverage_comment.outputs.COMMENT_FILE_WRITTEN == 'true' with: # If you use a different name, update COMMENT_ARTIFACT_NAME accordingly name: python-coverage-comment-action # If you use a different name, update COMMENT_FILENAME accordingly path: python-coverage-comment-action.txt
# .github/workflows/coverage.yml name: Post coverage comment on: workflow_run: workflows: ["CI"] types: - completed jobs: test: name: Run tests & display coverage runs-on: ubuntu-latest if: github.event.workflow_run.event == 'pull_request' && github.event.workflow_run.conclusion == 'success' permissions: # Gives the action the necessary permissions for publishing new # comments in pull requests. pull-requests: write # Gives the action the necessary permissions for editing existing # comments (to avoid publishing multiple comments in the same PR) contents: write # Gives the action the necessary permissions for looking up the # workflow that launched this workflow, and download the related # artifact that contains the comment to be published actions: read steps: # DO NOT run actions/checkout here, for security reasons # For details, refer to https://securitylab.github.com/research/github-actions-preventing-pwn-requests/ - name: Post comment uses: py-cov-action/python-coverage-comment-action@v3 with: GITHUB_TOKEN: ${{ secrets.GITHUB_TOKEN }} GITHUB_PR_RUN_ID: ${{ github.event.workflow_run.id }} # Update those if you changed the default values: # COMMENT_ARTIFACT_NAME: python-coverage-comment-action # COMMENT_FILENAME: python-coverage-comment-action.txtBasic usage without external contributors
If you don't expect external contributors, you don't need all the shenanigans with the artifacts and the 2nd workflow. This is likely to be the most straightforward way to configure it for private repositories. It might look like this:
# .github/workflows/ci.yml name: CI on: pull_request: push: branches: - "main" jobs: test: name: Run tests & display coverage runs-on: ubuntu-latest permissions: # Gives the action the necessary permissions for publishing new # comments in pull requests. pull-requests: write # Gives the action the necessary permissions for pushing data to the # python-coverage-comment-action branch, and for editing existing # comments (to avoid publishing multiple comments in the same PR) contents: write steps: - uses: actions/checkout@v4 - name: Install everything, run the tests, produce the .coverage file run: make test # This is the part where you put your own test command - name: Coverage comment uses: py-cov-action/python-coverage-comment-action@v3 with: GITHUB_TOKEN: ${{ github.token }}Merging multiple coverage reports
In case you have a job matrix and you want the report to be on the global coverage, you can configure your ci.yml
like this (coverage.yml
remains the same)
name: CI on: pull_request: push: branches: - "master" tags: - "*" jobs: build: strategy: matrix: include: - python_version: "3.7" - python_version: "3.8" - python_version: "3.9" - python_version: "3.10" name: "Python ${{ matrix.python_version }}" runs-on: ubuntu-latest steps: - uses: actions/checkout@v4 - name: Set up Python id: setup-python uses: actions/setup-python@v4 with: python-version: ${{ matrix.python_version }} - name: Install everything, run the tests, produce a .coverage.xxx file run: make test # This is the part where you put your own test command env: COVERAGE_FILE: ".coverage.${{ matrix.python_version }}" # The file name prefix must be ".coverage." for "coverage combine" # enabled by "MERGE_COVERAGE_FILES: true" to work. A "subprocess" # error with the message "No data to combine" will be triggered if # this prefix is not used. - name: Store coverage file uses: actions/upload-artifact@v4 with: name: coverage-${{ matrix.python_version }} path: .coverage.${{ matrix.python_version }} # By default hidden files/folders (i.e. starting with .) are ignored. # You may prefer (for security reasons) not setting this and instead # set COVERAGE_FILE above to not start with a `.`, but you cannot # use "MERGE_COVERAGE_FILES: true" later on and need to manually # combine the coverage file using "pipx run coverage combine" include-hidden-files: true coverage: name: Coverage runs-on: ubuntu-latest needs: build permissions: pull-requests: write contents: write steps: - uses: actions/checkout@v4 - uses: actions/download-artifact@v4 id: download with: pattern: coverage-* merge-multiple: true - name: Coverage comment id: coverage_comment uses: py-cov-action/python-coverage-comment-action@v3 with: GITHUB_TOKEN: ${{ secrets.GITHUB_TOKEN }} MERGE_COVERAGE_FILES: true - name: Store Pull Request comment to be posted uses: actions/upload-artifact@v4 if: steps.coverage_comment.outputs.COMMENT_FILE_WRITTEN == 'true' with: name: python-coverage-comment-action path: python-coverage-comment-action.txt
- name: Display coverage id: coverage_comment uses: py-cov-action/python-coverage-comment-action@v3 with: GITHUB_TOKEN: ${{ github.token }} # Change this in case you use GitHub Entreprise with a different API endpoint GITHUB_BASE_URL: https://api.github.com # Only necessary in the "workflow_run" workflow. GITHUB_PR_RUN_ID: ${{ inputs.GITHUB_PR_RUN_ID }} # Use this in case the folder to run coverage commands from is not the # top level of your repository COVERAGE_PATH: my_project/ # If the coverage percentage is above or equal to this value, the badge will be green. MINIMUM_GREEN: 100 # Same with orange. Below is red. MINIMUM_ORANGE: 70 # Maximum number of files to display in the comment. If there are more # files than this number, they will only appear in the workflow summary. # The selected files are the ones with the most new uncovered lines. The # closer this number gets to 35, the higher the risk that it reaches # GitHub's maximum comment size limit of 65536 characters. If you want # more files, you may need to use a custom comment template (see below). # (Feel free to open an issue.) MAX_FILES_IN_COMMENT: 25 # If true, will run `coverage combine` before reading the `.coverage` file. MERGE_COVERAGE_FILES: false # If true, will create an annotation on every line with missing coverage on a pull request. ANNOTATE_MISSING_LINES: false # Only needed if ANNOTATE_MISSING_LINES is set to true. This parameter allows you to choose between # notice, warning and error as annotation type. For more information look here: # https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/workflow-commands-for-github-actions#setting-a-notice-message ANNOTATION_TYPE: warning # Name of the artifact in which the body of the comment to post on the PR is stored. # You typically don't have to change this unless you're already using this name for something else. COMMENT_ARTIFACT_NAME: python-coverage-comment-action # Name of the file in which the body of the comment to post on the PR is stored. # In monorepo setting, see SUBPROJECT_ID. COMMENT_FILENAME: python-coverage-comment-action.txt # This setting is only necessary if you plan to run the action multiple times # in the same repository. It will be appended to the value of all the # settings that need to be unique, so as for the action to avoid mixing # up results of multiple runs. # Affects `COMMENT_FILENAME`, `COVERAGE_DATA_BRANCH`. # Ideally, use dashes (`-`) rather than underscrores (`_`) to split words, # for consistency SUBPROJECT_ID: null / "lib-name" # An alternative template for the comment for pull requests. See details below. COMMENT_TEMPLATE: The coverage rate is `{{ coverage.info.percent_covered | pct }}`{{ marker }} # Name of the branch in which coverage data will be stored on the repository. # Default is 'python-coverage-comment-action-data'. Please make sure that this # branch is not protected. # In monorepo setting, see SUBPROJECT_ID. COVERAGE_DATA_BRANCH: python-coverage-comment-action-data # Deprecated, see https://docs.github.com/en/actions/monitoring-and-troubleshooting-workflows/enabling-debug-logging VERBOSE: falseCommenting on the PR on the
push
event
This action's PR comments with coverage reports is designed to work when running on the pull_request
events. That being said, if your CI is running on feature branches on the push
events and not on the pull_request
events, we partly support a mode where the action can comment on the PR when running on the push
events instead. This is most likely only useful for setups not accepting external PRs and you will not have the best user experience. If that's something you need to do, please have a look at this issue.
By default, comments are generated from a Jinja template that you can read here.
If you want to change this template, you can set COMMENT_TEMPLATE
. This is an advanced usage, so you're likely to run into more road bumps.
You will need to follow some rules for your template to be valid:
{{ marker }}
, which includes an HTML comment (invisible on GitHub) that the action uses to identify its own comments.{% extends "base" %}
, and then override the blocks ({% block foo %}
) that you wish to change. If you're unsure how it works, see the Jinja documentationIn the first example, we change the emoji that illustrates coverage going down from :down_arrow:
to :sob:
:
{% extends "base" %} {% block emoji_coverage_down %}:sob:{% endblock emoji_coverage_down %}
In this second example, we replace the whole comment by something much shorter with the coverage (percentage) of the whole project from the PR build:
"Coverage: {{ coverage.info.percent_covered | pct }}{{ marker }}"
In case you want to use the action multiple times with different parts of your source (so you have multiple codebases into a single repo), you'll need to use SUBPROJECT_ID with a different value for each launch. You may still use the same step for storing all files as artifacts. You'll end up with a different comment for each launch. Feel free to use the COMMENT_TEMPLATE
if you want each comment to clearly state what it relates to.
# .github/workflows/ci.yml name: CI on: pull_request: push: branches: - "main" jobs: test: name: Run tests & display coverage runs-on: ubuntu-latest permissions: pull-requests: write contents: write steps: - uses: actions/checkout@v3 - name: Test project 1 run: make -C project_1 test - name: Test project 2 run: make -C project_2 test - name: Coverage comment (project 1) id: coverage_comment_1 uses: py-cov-action/python-coverage-comment-action@v3 with: COVERAGE_PATH: project_1 SUBPROJECT_ID: project-1 GITHUB_TOKEN: ${{ github.token }} - name: Coverage comment (project 2) id: coverage_comment_2 uses: py-cov-action/python-coverage-comment-action@v3 with: COVERAGE_PATH: project_2/src SUBPROJECT_ID: project-2 GITHUB_TOKEN: ${{ github.token }} - name: Store Pull Request comment to be posted uses: actions/upload-artifact@v4 if: steps.coverage_comment_1.outputs.COMMENT_FILE_WRITTEN == 'true' || steps.coverage_comment_2.outputs.COMMENT_FILE_WRITTEN == 'true' with: name: python-coverage-comment-action # Note the star path: python-coverage-comment-action*.txt
# .github/workflows/coverage.yml name: Post coverage comment on: workflow_run: workflows: ["CI"] types: - completed jobs: test: name: Run tests & display coverage runs-on: ubuntu-latest if: github.event.workflow_run.event == 'pull_request' && github.event.workflow_run.conclusion == 'success' permissions: pull-requests: write contents: write actions: read steps: - name: Post comment uses: py-cov-action/python-coverage-comment-action@v3 with: GITHUB_TOKEN: ${{ secrets.GITHUB_TOKEN }} GITHUB_PR_RUN_ID: ${{ github.event.workflow_run.id }} SUBPROJECT_ID: project-1 COVERAGE_PATH: project_1 - name: Post comment uses: py-cov-action/python-coverage-comment-action@v3 with: GITHUB_TOKEN: ${{ secrets.GITHUB_TOKEN }} GITHUB_PR_RUN_ID: ${{ github.event.workflow_run.id }} SUBPROJECT_ID: project-2 COVERAGE_PATH: project_2/src
On the examples above, the version was set to the tag v3
. Pinning to a major version will give you the latest release on this version. (Note that we release every time after a PR is merged). Pinning to a specific version (v3.1
for example) would make the action more reproducible, though you'd have to update it regularly (e.g. using Dependabot). You can also pin a commit hash if you want to be 100% sure of what you run, given that tags are mutable. Finally, You can also decide to pin to main, if you're OK with the action maybe breaking when (if) we release a v4.
This action is tested with 100% coverage. That said, coverage isn't all, and there may be a lot of remaining issues :)
We accept Pull Requests (for bug fixes and previously-discussed features), and bug reports. For feature requests, this might depend on how much time we have on our hands at the moment, and how well you manage to sell it but don't get your hopes too high.
Initially, the first iteration of this action was using the more generic coverage.xml
(Cobertura) in order to be language independent. It was later discovered that this format is very badly specified, as are mostly all coverage formats. For this reason, we switched to the much more specialized .coverage
file that is only produced for Python projects (also, the action was rewritten from the ground up). Because this would likely completely break compatibility, a brand new action (this action) was created.
You can find the (unmaintained) language-generic version here.
Why do we needrelative_files = true
?
Yes, I agree, this is annoying! The reason is that by default, coverage writes the full path to the file in the .coverage
file, but the path is most likely different between the moment where your coverage is generated (in your workflow) and the moment where the report is computed (in the action, which runs inside a docker).
A previous version of this action did things with the wiki. This is not the case anymore.
.coverage file generated on a Windows file systemIf your project's coverage was built on Windows, you may get an error like:
CoverageWarning: Couldn't parse 'yourproject\__init__.py': No source for code: 'yourproject\__init__.py'. (couldnt-parse)
This is likely due to coverage being confused with the coverage being computed with \
but read with /
. You can most probably fix it with the following in your coverage configuration:
[paths]
source =
*/project/module
*\project\module
This action is supposedly compatible with private repository. Just make sure to use the svg badge directly, and not the shields.io
URL.
This action should be compatible with GitHub Enterprise. Just make sure to set the GITHUB_BASE_URL
input to your GHE URL.
When upgrading, we change the location and format where the coverage data is kept. Pull request that have not been re-based may be displaying slightly wrong information.
New comment format starting with 3.19Starting with 3.19, the format for the Pull Request changed to a table with badges. We've been iterating a lot on the new format. It's perfectly ok if you preferred the old format. In that case, see #335 for instructions on how to emulate the old format using COMMENT_TEMPLATE
.
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4