Skip to content
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

CI: switch to non-deprecated singular form #459

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Nov 5, 2024

Conversation

felixfontein
Copy link
Contributor

SUMMARY

The plural form has been removed from ansible-core devel. The singluar form has been present since ansible-base 2.10.

Ref: https://forum.ansible.com/t/couldnt-resolve-module-action-community-crypto-openssl-privatekey-only-with-ansible-core-devel/10711/2

ISSUE TYPE
  • Test Pull Request
COMPONENT NAME

GHA CI

The plural form has been removed from ansible-core devel.
The singluar form has been present since ansible-base 2.10.
Copy link

codecov bot commented Nov 5, 2024

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 99.21%. Comparing base (ff5d334) to head (9c646f8).
Report is 1 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files
@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main     #459   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   99.21%   99.21%           
=======================================
  Files         110      110           
  Lines        5767     5767           
  Branches     1088     1088           
=======================================
  Hits         5722     5722           
  Misses         36       36           
  Partials        9        9           
Flag Coverage Δ
env_docker-default 99.21% <ø> (ø)
integration 85.66% <ø> (ø)
sanity 37.33% <ø> (ø)
target_auth_approle 89.47% <ø> (ø)
target_auth_aws_iam 50.00% <ø> (?)
target_auth_azure 53.84% <ø> (ø)
target_auth_cert 86.36% <ø> (ø)
target_auth_jwt 91.30% <ø> (ø)
target_auth_ldap 89.47% <ø> (ø)
target_auth_none 100.00% <ø> (ø)
target_auth_token 71.42% <ø> (?)
target_auth_userpass 85.71% <ø> (ø)
target_connection_options 74.76% <ø> (ø)
target_controller 83.82% <ø> (ø)
target_filter_vault_login_token 77.77% <ø> (ø)
target_import 37.33% <ø> (ø)
target_lookup_hashi_vault 85.29% <ø> (ø)
target_lookup_vault_ansible_settings 55.51% <ø> (?)
target_lookup_vault_kv1_get 100.00% <ø> (?)
target_lookup_vault_kv2_get 100.00% <ø> (ø)
target_lookup_vault_list ?
target_lookup_vault_login 100.00% <ø> (ø)
target_lookup_vault_read 100.00% <ø> (?)
target_lookup_vault_token_create ?
target_lookup_vault_write 56.91% <ø> (?)
target_module_utils 96.53% <ø> (ø)
target_module_vault_database_connection_configure 56.22% <ø> (?)
target_module_vault_database_connection_delete 56.04% <ø> (ø)
target_module_vault_database_connection_read 55.97% <ø> (ø)
target_module_vault_database_connection_reset 56.04% <ø> (ø)
target_module_vault_database_connections_list 55.46% <ø> (ø)
target_module_vault_database_role_create 55.46% <ø> (ø)
target_module_vault_database_role_delete 56.04% <ø> (ø)
target_module_vault_database_role_read 55.97% <ø> (?)
target_module_vault_database_roles_list 55.46% <ø> (ø)
target_module_vault_database_rotate_root_creds 55.85% <ø> (ø)
target_module_vault_database_static_role_create 56.22% <ø> (ø)
target_module_vault_database_static_role_get_creds 55.97% <ø> (ø)
target_module_vault_database_static_role_read 55.97% <ø> (ø)
target_module_vault_database_static_role_rotate_creds 55.85% <ø> (ø)
target_module_vault_database_static_roles_list 55.46% <ø> (ø)
target_module_vault_kv1_get 97.43% <ø> (ø)
target_module_vault_kv2_delete 56.68% <ø> (ø)
target_module_vault_kv2_get 97.36% <ø> (ø)
target_module_vault_kv2_write 57.09% <ø> (?)
target_module_vault_list 96.96% <ø> (ø)
target_module_vault_login 93.93% <ø> (ø)
target_module_vault_pki_generate_certificate 84.61% <ø> (ø)
target_module_vault_read 96.96% <ø> (ø)
target_module_vault_token_create 91.66% <ø> (ø)
target_module_vault_write 55.85% <ø> (ø)
target_modules 88.94% <ø> (ø)
units 96.35% <ø> (ø)

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

Copy link
Collaborator

@briantist briantist left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@felixfontein thank you!

@felixfontein
Copy link
Contributor Author

@briantist the codecov step is playing havoc:

Warning: Codecov tokenless upload from fork failed. Waiting 3557 seconds to try again [attempt 1 of 5].

Waiting for 59 minutes, that's just... crazy?!

@briantist
Copy link
Collaborator

@briantist the codecov step is playing havoc:

Warning: Codecov tokenless upload from fork failed. Waiting 3557 seconds to try again [attempt 1 of 5].

Waiting for 59 minutes, that's just... crazy?!

Codecov has been really unreliable using "tokenless" upload lately due to GitHub API limits. I modified the workflow to use the retry time given in the upload errors and to simply wait. It eventually will succeed, probably taking hours, whereas before it would fail repeatedly.

The real solution is to use a token, which makes the workflow more complicated in order to access the secret token on forks.

I can probably also mitigate much of the failures by reducing the flags I use in codecov which would significantly reduce the number of uploads I do.

@briantist briantist merged commit afc77bd into ansible-collections:main Nov 5, 2024
68 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants