[Inquiry/Feature Request] Coverage Difference on Pull Requests

[YaleChen299]

As per title, it would be great if the comment can display the coverage difference of the branches of the PR.

Something like this:

coverage: $\color{green} 94.3%$. Improved by $\color{green} +2.1%$ when pulling from feat to main .
coverage: $\color{green} 90.0%$. Remain the same$ when pulling from feat to main .
coverage: $\color{green} 89.3%$. Dropped by $\color{red} -1.1%$ when pulling from feat to main.

Let me know if this is already a feature! Thanks for the work! Enjoyed this workflow!

[aviralpostman]

I had made some changes in my fork to enable this. If this is what you require, I can try raising a PR:

To compare the coverage difference, I'm storing the coverage info in cache i.e. whenever a PR is merged, a workflow will get triggered on the main branch, run the tests there and update the coverage information in the gh-actions cache. The action would thus look require the push event to be part of the workflow.

[ruthus18]

@aviralpostman looks great! Could you please upload your fork to public or raise the PR?

[CuriousLearner]

Hi @aviralpostman Can you please link to your fork?

[Alex-ley-scrub]

If you click on @aviralpostman's profile you will see https://github.com/aviralpostman/jest-coverage-comment-aviral-fork which looks like is the fork in question (but for jest not pytest, although I'm sure the idea is the same)

[aviralpostman]

yes, it's for jest. I had implemented a working solution for my org and wanted to contribute to this repo via the fork. But, something is not working in my fork 🥺. The idea is store the coverage in gh-actions cache and pull it to compare.
I'll see if I can wrap the implementation this week. But, if someone is interested to pick up, he/she is most welcome