Skip to content

Comments

internal: Configure codecov#21660

Open
Wilfred wants to merge 1 commit intorust-lang:masterfrom
Wilfred:configure_codecov
Open

internal: Configure codecov#21660
Wilfred wants to merge 1 commit intorust-lang:masterfrom
Wilfred:configure_codecov

Conversation

@Wilfred
Copy link
Contributor

@Wilfred Wilfred commented Feb 17, 2026

It would be wonderful to have test coverage tracking for rust-analyzer. I've added a basic configuration.

This will need adding a token to the secrets on this repository, but this is a good first step.

You can see a coverage report in my fork: https://app.codecov.io/github/Wilfred/rust-analyzer/commit/33f0a8efda0c2418343df02f590b42d08783ea89/tree

@rustbot rustbot added the S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. label Feb 17, 2026
@Veykril
Copy link
Member

Veykril commented Feb 18, 2026

cc @Kobzol re secret. Also does any other rust repo do code coverage yet? Curious if we already have in project solutions here to use

@Kobzol
Copy link
Member

Kobzol commented Feb 18, 2026

Looks like crates.io have some codecov config (https://github.com/rust-lang/crates.io/blob/d1cd75749886a8c133af561e7a6f348d28679fcc/codecov.yml#L4), but I'm not sure if it's exercised in CI. @Turbo87 any experiences with that?

Regarding the secret, opened a Zulip thread.

@Turbo87
Copy link
Member

Turbo87 commented Feb 18, 2026

Looks like crates.io have some codecov config (rust-lang/crates.io@d1cd757/codecov.yml#L4), but I'm not sure if it's exercised in CI.

not anymore, no

any experiences with that?

we tried it out for a while and it worked okayish, but it significantly impacted our compile and test times in CI since we were running it on PRs too. we ultimately removed it again from CI since we figured the tradeoff wasn't worth it at the moment but apparently forgot to remove the config file again.

@Wilfred
Copy link
Contributor Author

Wilfred commented Feb 18, 2026

FWIW the coverage build here took 5 minutes, comparable to the normal test builds (Linux: 4 minutes, macOS: 7 minutes, Windows: 7 minutes).

I guess if PR performance was a concern we could configure coverage to only run on pushes on the master branch. That'd probably still give us most of the value.

@Wilfred
Copy link
Contributor Author

Wilfred commented Feb 20, 2026

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties.

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants