ci: GHA: use scripts/report-coverage.sh

[blueyed]

This allows for more control, e.g. -X fix with codecov-bash, and it has all the coverage-calls we need already etc.

[nicoddemus]

TBH I prefer using the action instead of a custom script, so I'm -0 (but not completely opposed).

[blueyed]

@nicoddemus
Why do you prefer the action? It wraps codecov-bash apparently also only (#6463 (comment)), while not handling e.g. retries which we have with our curl invocation already.
Also it seems to be basically a large, obfuscated code blob, while using the bash script ourselves is more transparent.
Additionally, it might result in differences with regard to what is reported between Travis and GHA.

[blueyed]

Alternative: #6560 - but failed on the first run already, and then the 2nd..!

[nicoddemus]

Actually it does retries automatically, I've seen it sleeping for 30s a number of times before trying to upload again before codecov doesn't respond.

Also it seems to be basically a large, obfuscated code blob, while using the bash script ourselves is more transparent.

Not sure if you mean the yaml configuration or the action code itself.

Additionally, it might result in differences with regard to what is reported between Travis and GHA.

But this is temporary, I hope. Which would be fine to narrow down why GH action coverage is less than Travis.

Like I said, I'm -0 on this, so please go ahead if think it is better. 👍

[blueyed]

Not sure if you mean the yaml configuration or the action code itself.

The JS code (the action).

But this is temporary, I hope. Which would be fine to narrow down why GH action coverage is less than Travis.

Well, it also is helpful to have it failing. As seen in #6560 it failed twice in a row, which likely is the reason for flaky coverage.