Conversation
Codecov ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #2874 +/- ##
============================================
- Coverage 80.91% 78.35% -2.56%
Complexity 2526 2526
============================================
Files 146 173 +27
Lines 14711 18742 +4031
Branches 0 976 +976
============================================
+ Hits 11903 14686 +2783
- Misses 2808 3519 +711
- Partials 0 537 +537
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.
... and 27 files with indirect coverage changes Continue to review full report in Codecov by Sentry.
|
Benchmarks [ appsec ]Benchmark execution time: 2024-10-04 19:34:27 Comparing candidate commit 2b7daba in PR branch Found 0 performance improvements and 0 performance regressions! Performance is the same for 12 metrics, 0 unstable metrics. |
estringana
force-pushed
the
estringana/fix-appsec-tests
branch
from
c3aa174 to
916748b
Compare
bwoebi
left a comment
bwoebi
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yep, that's right. We missed that due to CircleCI only running appsec tests if appsec files actually change...
That's an interesting point. The pipeline is still failing(https://app.circleci.com/pipelines/github/DataDog/dd-trace-php/17765/workflows/2032cd3f-dccf-4421-a563-45c35b9354e6/jobs/5318766 and a few more). Should we run appsec always? We have many functionality depending on the tracer so tecnically any change to the tracer can break appsec |
4 participants
Description
Reviewer checklist