Add static code analysis to GitHub Actions about scores

[tennlee]

That makes sense. I'm aware of the third-party approached to coverage reporting. They provide some nice additional features, but it's also an additional technology to maintain. I'm open to it, but let's have that discussion about what we want after closing out the current issue?

[aidanjgriffiths]

@John-Sharples I fixed the no coverage collected issue in #87. It had to do with requiring an editable install as pytest-cov points to the local repo files instead of the installation files in /usr/bin or venv. Somehow coverage manages this case where `pytest-cov doesn't.

As for badges, I had a look at how to implement badges in actions and it is such a stuff around compared to gitlab that I don't even want to try 😄.

As for this I think we could close this issue since pre-commit and tests have been implemented in the develop pipeline already.

[tennlee]

Looks like a great start, but where does the coverage report end up? I couldn't work out how to actually put the output report somewhere in a nicely viewable way. It's worthwhile regardless, but it would be ncie to have easily viewable results

[John-Sharples]

These changes just get the coverage working. Currently pytest raises this warning CoverageWarning: No data was collected. (no-data-collected) and there's no coverage reported. I've added an extra task to specifically report coverage in the job output, so you can click through and find it there.

If we want to adopt a third party tool to make it a bit more visible, there's several options, eg:

• coverage-badges https://github.com/jaywcjlove/coverage-badges-cli
• metplus uses coverall which gives an output like this https://coveralls.io/jobs/129518664

Happy to work on adding one of these too, if we can decide what we want.