Skip to content

test_runner: correctly filter --experimental-config-file #58833

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

pmarchini
Copy link
Member

Opening as a draft since I need to add at least one test to cover the regression.
Should address #58828

@nodejs-github-bot
Copy link
Collaborator

Review requested:

  • @nodejs/test_runner

@nodejs-github-bot nodejs-github-bot added needs-ci PRs that need a full CI run. test_runner Issues and PRs related to the test runner subsystem. labels Jun 25, 2025
dcq01

This comment was marked as off-topic.

@JakobJingleheimer

This comment was marked as off-topic.

@pmarchini pmarchini marked this pull request as ready for review June 27, 2025 11:58
Copy link

codecov bot commented Jun 27, 2025

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 90.08%. Comparing base (100c6da) to head (ecb029f).
Report is 22 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main   #58833      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   90.10%   90.08%   -0.02%     
==========================================
  Files         640      640              
  Lines      188384   188453      +69     
  Branches    36932    36970      +38     
==========================================
+ Hits       169735   169775      +40     
- Misses      11356    11395      +39     
+ Partials     7293     7283      -10     
Files with missing lines Coverage Δ
lib/internal/test_runner/runner.js 92.70% <100.00%> (+0.05%) ⬆️

... and 51 files with indirect coverage changes

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
  • ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
  • 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

Copy link
Member

@JakobJingleheimer JakobJingleheimer left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

🙌 LGTM

@JakobJingleheimer JakobJingleheimer added the request-ci Add this label to start a Jenkins CI on a PR. label Jun 27, 2025
@github-actions github-actions bot removed the request-ci Add this label to start a Jenkins CI on a PR. label Jun 27, 2025
@nodejs-github-bot
Copy link
Collaborator

@nodejs-github-bot
Copy link
Collaborator

@nodejs-github-bot
Copy link
Collaborator

@pmarchini
Copy link
Member Author

There's a related failing CI, I'll investigate ASAP

@JakobJingleheimer
Copy link
Member

Ah, yes. Looks like test/parallel/test-runner-cli.js:476 AssertionError [ERR_ASSERTION]: Expected values to be strictly equal: undefined !== 1

@pmarchini
Copy link
Member Author

https://github.com/nodejs/node/blob/main/test%2Fparallel%2Ftest-coverage-with-inspector-disabled.js <-- I keep forgetting this every time: coverage-related tests must be skipped under specific cases 😁 I'll update the test ASAP

@nodejs-github-bot
Copy link
Collaborator

@JakobJingleheimer
Copy link
Member

I keep forgetting this every time: coverage-related tests must be skipped under specific cases 😁 I'll update the test ASAP

TIL 💡

@pmarchini pmarchini marked this pull request as draft June 28, 2025 11:32
@pmarchini pmarchini marked this pull request as ready for review June 28, 2025 11:44
@nodejs-github-bot
Copy link
Collaborator

@nodejs-github-bot
Copy link
Collaborator

@nodejs-github-bot
Copy link
Collaborator

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
needs-ci PRs that need a full CI run. test_runner Issues and PRs related to the test runner subsystem.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants