feat(cli): add --report-junit as an alias of --log-junit#711
Merged
Conversation
Provides naming parity with --report-html. Both flags set BASHUNIT_LOG_JUNIT and write the same JUnit XML report. Closes #705
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Summary
Adds
--report-junit <file>as an alias of--log-junit, giving naming parity with the existing--report-html. Both flags setBASHUNIT_LOG_JUNITand emit the same JUnit XML.Changes
--report-junitparsed alongside--log-junitinsrc/main.sh.command-line.mdtable updated.On SARIF (the issue's other half)
Deferred deliberately. SARIF is a format for static-analysis / security findings consumed by GitHub code scanning, not for test results. Test reporting is already well served by JUnit XML and the GitHub Actions annotations (
--log-gha, #704). Emitting test failures as SARIF would misuse the format. If there's a concrete code-scanning use case we can revisit it as its own issue.Closes #705