Skip to content

Conversation

@2-towns
Copy link

@2-towns 2-towns commented Oct 30, 2025

Just a draft PR for tracking changes easily for Codex integration

marcinczenko and others added 30 commits October 30, 2025 05:10
The new script allows running all the tests as well as selected tests
@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Oct 30, 2025

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 32.57732% with 981 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 49.84%. Comparing base (d165cf8) to head (d8d05ab).
⚠️ Report is 2 commits behind head on develop.

Files with missing lines Patch % Lines
protocol/communities/manager_archive_file.go 5.76% 278 Missing ⚠️
protocol/communities/manager_archive.go 14.76% 223 Missing and 8 partials ⚠️
protocol/messenger_handler.go 0.00% 143 Missing ⚠️
protocol/messenger_communities.go 2.67% 108 Missing and 1 partial ⚠️
protocol/communities/persistence.go 16.36% 45 Missing and 1 partial ⚠️
protocol/communities/manager.go 6.52% 41 Missing and 2 partials ⚠️
protocol/messenger_communities_import_discord.go 0.00% 38 Missing ⚠️
protocol/communities/codex_index_downloader.go 83.43% 25 Missing and 3 partials ⚠️
protocol/communities/codex_archive_downloader.go 90.64% 17 Missing and 2 partials ⚠️
...s/set_community_archive_distribution_preference.go 0.00% 12 Missing ⚠️
... and 11 more

❗ There is a different number of reports uploaded between BASE (d165cf8) and HEAD (d8d05ab). Click for more details.

HEAD has 2 uploads less than BASE
Flag BASE (d165cf8) HEAD (d8d05ab)
functional 2 1
unit 2 1
Additional details and impacted files
@@             Coverage Diff             @@
##           develop    #7046      +/-   ##
===========================================
- Coverage    59.77%   49.84%   -9.94%     
===========================================
  Files          805      810       +5     
  Lines       114125   115648    +1523     
===========================================
- Hits         68221    57646   -10575     
- Misses       38918    52044   +13126     
+ Partials      6986     5958    -1028     
Flag Coverage Δ
functional 35.85% <2.62%> (+0.02%) ⬆️
unit 34.37% <31.89%> (-20.95%) ⬇️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

Files with missing lines Coverage Δ
api/defaults.go 75.32% <100.00%> (+0.75%) ⬆️
api/test_helpers.go 100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
cmd/push-notification-server/main.go 51.66% <ø> (ø)
protocol/communities/codex_client_interface.go 41.00% <100.00%> (ø)
protocol/messenger.go 42.08% <100.00%> (-19.32%) ⬇️
protocol/messenger_config.go 87.64% <100.00%> (-6.30%) ⬇️
protocol/messenger_contact_verification.go 37.47% <ø> (-12.58%) ⬇️
services/ext/service.go 26.78% <100.00%> (+0.14%) ⬆️
protocol/communities/community_event.go 3.46% <0.00%> (-57.81%) ⬇️
...mmunities/communnity_privileged_member_sync_msg.go 0.00% <0.00%> (-76.58%) ⬇️
... and 19 more

... and 188 files with indirect coverage changes


// Ideally use EnableCommunityHistoryArchiveProtocol
s.owner.archiveManager.SetCodexConfig(&ownercodexConfig)
err = s.owner.archiveManager.StartCodexClient()
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Without looking at the code, I thought Codex nodes were meant to be started automatically in SetOnline?

Copy link
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I am not sure about SetOnline because it is called when there is a connection change. But at least it should be called with EnableCommunityHistoryArchiveProtocol yes.

// https://github.com/status-im/status-go/blob/6c82a6c2be7ebed93bcae3b9cf5053da3820de50/protocol/communities/manager.go#L4403

// Ensure owner has archive
archiveIndex, err := s.owner.archiveManager.CodexLoadHistoryArchiveIndexFromFile(s.owner.identity, community.ID())
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I guess I had envisioned this test a bit differently. I was thinking that we'd create a getter/setter for messageArchiveInterval so that this value could be updated something very short for testing. This value will need to be settable for DST tests.

Copy link
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Yes agree 100%. I just created a first version which is a copy of the torrent one to see if it works for Codex. I will look to improve this test.

@marcinczenko marcinczenko force-pushed the status-go-codex-integraion-arnaud branch from d8d05ab to 5761ad4 Compare November 2, 2025 06:28
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants