-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 6.5k
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
Add CI reporters (AppVeyor, CircleCI, etc) and automatically enable when appropriate #3536
Comments
#3668 might make this easier? (cc @DmitriiAbramov) |
Cool thanks, sounds like #3349 is the way to go. |
Sounds like this is done and there are reporters like jest-silent-reporter for exactly this use case |
I haven't seen any reporters that actually implement reporting to a CI
service. This issue was to implement them. We should leave it open until at
least an AppVeyor reporter is done.
Sent from my phone.
…On Sat, May 26, 2018, 3:52 PM Rick Hanlon II ***@***.***> wrote:
Closed #3536 <#3536>.
—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#3536 (comment)>, or mute
the thread
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAFnHbOIFVOtgo8eWO8cG5yXZApN4Plwks5t2dyygaJpZM4NWKZ1>
.
|
There is jest-junit, isn't that enough for most CIs nowadays? |
We've added custom reporters to Jest platform for the community to create. Should we be responsible for creating and maintaining CI specific reporters? |
We'll need one for our own purposes I think, might as well make it available. Although I'm fine with it living in |
A JUnit XML reporter should be sufficient for many use cases, however often
it's possible to have deeper integrations. What would be really nice is if
Jest automatically selected the right reporter based on environment, for a
few common environments. So for example, when running tests on AppVeyor,
it'd automatically submit the test results to AppVeyor's API. Some other
popular frameworks do that (eg. I think XUnit does it)
Although I guess this could be a community thing, like a wrapper around
Jest that automatically configures the right reporter?
Sent from my phone.
…On Sat, May 26, 2018, 4:52 PM Rick Hanlon II ***@***.***> wrote:
We've added custom reporters to Jest platform for the community to create.
Should we be responsible for creating and maintaining CI specific reporters?
—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#3536 (comment)>, or mute
the thread
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAFnHcg-a-UZx4B9NTRRNC-0xaslTC-Zks5t2eq6gaJpZM4NWKZ1>
.
|
Having a CI-reporter that's just a meta package over a bunch of CI reporters sounds lika a pretty sweet out-of-the-box experience. Then it'd just |
This issue is stale because it has been open for 1 year with no activity. Remove stale label or comment or this will be closed in 30 days. |
This issue was closed because it has been stalled for 7 days with no activity. Please open a new issue if the issue is still relevant, linking to this one. |
This issue has been automatically locked since there has not been any recent activity after it was closed. Please open a new issue for related bugs. |
Do you want to request a feature or report a bug?
Feature
What is the current behavior?
Currently, in order to properly report test status (pass/fail) in CI environments, people need to manually modify their configuration. For example, see how we handle AppVeyor in this repo: #1602. The basic console output works, but having deeper CI integration is much nicer.
What is the expected behavior?
Some other test frameworks automatically detect the environment and use the correct reporter for that environment. For example, xUnit has an AppVeyor reporter that automatically detects the environment and enables itself when tests run on AppVeyor (https://github.com/xunit/xunit/blob/master/src/xunit.runner.reporters/AppVeyorReporter.cs).
Would be good to support AppVeyor, CircleCI, TeamCity and Jenkins. 😄
We should at least have a reporter that generates JUnit XML, as it's the defacto standard for unit test output.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: