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

What is the formal specification for the output files generated by force:apex:test:run ? #311

Open
RupertBarrow opened this issue Jan 9, 2023 · 2 comments
Labels

Comments

@RupertBarrow
Copy link

Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.
sfdx force:apex:test:run -r junitgenerates output files described in here (https://developer.salesforce.com/blogs/2021/04/clearer-apex-commands) to describe test results and code coverage.
What is the formal specification for these files ?
Where are their schemas defined ?
Are these compatible with test summary tools and code coverage report solutions which expect JUnit input format files ?

What are you trying to do
I'm trying to consume the output of sfdx force:apex:test:run -r junit to display Github Checks displayed by solutions such as Code Coverage or JUnit Coverage Report (https://github.com/marketplace/actions/junit-coverage-report)

Describe the solution you'd like
I would like to be able to generate output files which adhere to a standard, in this case the JUnit XML schema, and a code coverage format such as Cobertura XML, Jacoco XML.

Describe alternatives you've considered
None.

Additional context
I'm looking to inject results into Github Actions CI, so :

  • produce a summary compatible with Github Checks to display in a PR
  • add Github Annotations to code to point out lines of code covered/uncovered by tests
@git2gus
Copy link

git2gus bot commented Jan 9, 2023

This issue has been linked to a new work item: W-12347811

@github-actions
Copy link

github-actions bot commented Jan 9, 2023

Thank you for filing this feature request. We appreciate your feedback and will review the feature at our next grooming or sprint planning session. We prioritize feature requests with more upvotes and comments.

@cristiand391 cristiand391 transferred this issue from forcedotcom/cli Jan 10, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant