@cypress/code-coverage attempts to collect back-end coverage when we are not running end-to-end tests

[funkadelic]

Logs and screenshots

code-coverage combined NYC options { 'report-dir': './coverage', reporter: [ 'lcov', 'json-summary', 'text', 'cobertura' ], extension: [ '.jsx', '.js' ], excludeAfterRemap: false, sourceMap: false, instrument: false } +0ms
code-coverage reset code coverage in interactive mode +0ms
code-coverage reset code coverage in interactive mode +2s
code-coverage parsed sent coverage +8s
code-coverage wrote coverage file /Users/nyee2/dev/plugins/campaign-manager-web-plugin/.nyc_output/out.json +30ms
code-coverage parsed sent coverage +721ms
code-coverage wrote coverage file /Users/nyee2/dev/plugins/campaign-manager-web-plugin/.nyc_output/
code-coverage parsed sent coverage +2s
code-coverage wrote coverage file /Users/nyee2/dev/plugins/campaign-manager-web-plugin/.nyc_output/out.json +61ms
code-coverage parsed sent coverage +915ms
code-coverage wrote coverage file /Users/nyee2/dev/plugins/campaign-manager-web-plugin/.nyc_output/out.json +54ms
code-coverage parsed sent coverage +799ms
code-coverage wrote coverage file /Users/nyee2/dev/plugins/campaign-manager-web-plugin/.nyc_output/out.json +57ms
code-coverage parsed sent coverage +3s
code-coverage wrote coverage file /Users/nyee2/dev/plugins/campaign-manager-web-plugin/.nyc_output/out.json +50ms
code-coverage parsed sent coverage +2s
code-coverage wrote coverage file /Users/nyee2/dev/plugins/campaign-manager-web-plugin/.nyc_output/out.json +53ms

Versions

• @cypress/code-coverage v3.9.7
• Cypress 7.0.1
• OS: MacOS Big Sur 11.4
• shell: bash
• Node v14.16.0
• NPM 6.14.11
• How do you instrument your application? babel-plugin-istanbul
• do you see window.__coverage__ object? yes, window.__coverage__ exists and instrumentation works
• Is there .nyc_output folder? yes coverage data is generated
• custom NYC settings in package.json

  "nyc": {
    "extension": [
      ".jsx",
      ".js"
    ],
    "reporter": [
      "lcov",
      "json-summary",
      "text",
      "cobertura"
    ],
    "sourceMap": false,
    "instrument": false
  },

• Do you run Cypress tests in a Docker container? yes in CI, MacOS locally

Describe the bug
The logic to determine if cypress is running an "end-to-end" test incorrectly resolves as true in my cypress tests, as our baseUrl and proxyUrl are different.

Code reference in question:

code-coverage/support.js

Lines 168 to 172 in c51751f

	const runningEndToEndTests = baseUrl !== Cypress.config('proxyUrl')
	const specType = Cypress._.get(Cypress.spec, 'specType', 'integration')
	const isIntegrationSpec = specType === 'integration'
	if (runningEndToEndTests && isIntegrationSpec) {

From the above code, runningEndToEndTests evaluates to true if your baseUrl and proxyUrl are different, which they are in my case but I am not running end-to-end tests.

As my specType is integration, after tests complete an attempt is made to reach a /coverage URL which does not exist, thus failing the test.

I would like to propose perhaps setting & checking against a new config codeCoverage.expectFrontendCoverageOnly explicitly to determine if backend coverage needs to be collected (similar to the pre-existing expectBackendCoverageOnly config), eg. the above code reference could be augmented to preserve the existing behavior but allowing an explicit check against expectFrontendCoverageOnly

const runningEndToEndTests = baseUrl !== Cypress.config('proxyUrl')
const specType = Cypress._.get(Cypress.spec, 'specType', 'integration')
const isIntegrationSpec = specType === 'integration'
const expectFrontendCoverageOnly = Cypress._.get(Cypress.env('codeCoverage'), 'expectFrontendCoverageOnly', 
  false)

if (!expectFrontendCoverageOnly && runningEndToEndTests && isIntegrationSpec) {

Link to the repo
The code I am using @cypress/code-coverage is behind a private GH instance so I unfortunately can't share here. I have created #474 with the above suggestion

[eulersson]

I'm facing the same issue. Can a collaborator have a look at @funkadelic good idea and merge it or tell us how we can help?

[natre01]

I'm also experiencing this and would like a solution

[VeronikaBe]

Still relevant. Could someone with write access pls approve the PR #555 ?
This would be really helpful