Extend coverage to docker container - #82
Conversation
Sorry, something went wrong.
combine it with the rest, to avoid missing a load of test coverage
thompson318
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This all looks OK to me and works. None of the changes proposed should impact production deployment so it should be harmless. So on that basis I'd be happy to see it merged.
On the other hand it adds complexity to the test set up for I think only marginal gain. We end up boosting the coverage numbers based on the snakemake integration test which is good, but I think it would be preferable to boost coverage via more unit tests. So maybe just leave it hanging for now until we have more time to think about testing strategy.
Sorry, something went wrong.
thompson318
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
As discussed in meeting, approving this on the basis that it does no harm and is good enough for the moment.
Sorry, something went wrong.
Codecov Report✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests. @@ Coverage Diff @@
## dev #82 +/- ##
===========================================
+ Coverage 23.07% 59.20% +36.13%
===========================================
Files 12 12
Lines 429 429
Branches 0 33 +33
===========================================
+ Hits 99 254 +155
+ Misses 330 160 -170
- Partials 0 15 +15 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Harness.
|
Sorry, something went wrong.
This works but seems a bit hacky. Not going to spend more time on it for now.