Status of coverage icon indicators dont match thresholds set in jest.config.js

Describe a bug

Firstly thanks for taking the time to create this GitHub action! It’s very nice and working pretty much exactly how we want it to.

We are however experiencing some confusion around the ‘Status of coverage’ traffic light icons in the first column of the report. As per below, both Branches and Functions are reporting that they are ‘Under the threshold’, however our jest.config.js has the thresholds set as per below so they should be ‘Slightly more then threshold’

  coverageThreshold: {
    global: {
      branches: 56,
      functions: 47,
      lines: 78,
      statements: 79,
    },
  }

Expected behavior

The ‘Status of coverage’ column icons should show the correct color based on what is set in the jest.config.js file.

Details

• Action version: v2

• OS, where your action is running (windows, linux): linux

• action.yml file

    - uses: ArtiomTr/jest-coverage-report-action@v2
      with:
        test-script: yarn jest
        package-manager: yarn
        skip-step: install
        annotations: none
  

• Screenshots

  

Additional context

N/A

[raspo]

Thank you for the detailed response @ArtiomTr! I like the overall plan, the new status table makes a lot more sense, although the table would probably end up having a single row for most people. 🤷‍♂️

St.	Threshold group	Statements	Branches	Functions	Lines
🟢	global	30% (10%)	70%	90% (40%)	50% (10%)

I think that as one of the first step I will have to add some tests for this part, because (as far as I can tell) the coverage is a bit lacking in this area 😅 Do you have any recommendations on how I should go about it? Like adding more tests to tests/run.test.ts or just refactor src/stages/checkThreshold.ts to make it more easily testable?!

[ArtiomTr]

Hello @raspo 👋,

Thank you for taking on this issue! I can’t remember, what was the reason for doing this. All this threshold-checking logic is implemented a bit incorrectly, so I’ve abandoned this logic in favour of the newly created package @covbot/jest-threshold. This package runs the same algorithm as jest does, but outputs much more useful output.

So, I wanted to rework the whole “status” logic a bit, to output more useful information in the report. Instead of showing generic statuses in the report, this algorithm could be performed:

1. If retrieving coverage thresholds from jest configuration failed (the user doesn’t have them or just an unexpected error occurred), show the generic “statuses”, as it was before.
2. If coverage thresholds were successfully extracted:
   1. Show the generic statuses, if only the “global” threshold is provided
   2. Otherwise, show the new “status” table.

The new status table could look like this:

St.	Threshold group	Statements	Branches	Functions	Lines
🟢	global	30% (10%)	70%	90% (40%)	50% (10%)
🔴	packages/a	10% (77%)	50%	30%	20%
🟡	packages/b	50%	50% (27%)	70%	10% (32%)

Where the coverages are being shown per each threshold group, in the format “covered% (threshold%)”. I think this format would give the most correct presentation on how coverage changed in PR.

That’s a quite large task, so any help would be appreciated. For instance, you can begin by just replacing the old threshold-checking logic with a new one from the @covbot/jest-threshold package. Thank you in advance.