[andrcuns]

Context

Cucumber scenarios with the same name in different feature files, or RSpec examples with the same full description in different spec files, can be merged into a single test in Allure. This can hide a real failure as a retry when another test with the same name passes.

This change gives tests stable, file-aware identities so that tests in different files remain separate, even when their displayed names match. These identities do not depend on source line numbers or example order. Cucumber scenario outline rows share the outline's identity, with their parameters distinguishing the individual variants.

Test history compatibility: This change may affect test history in the report. After upgrading, some tests may appear as new, and their history may restart or no longer link to results generated with earlier adapter versions because Allure now identifies them differently.

Checklist

• Sign Allure CLA
• Provide unit tests

[github-actions]

Allure Report Summary

	Environment	Duration	Stats	New	Flaky	Retry
	All tests	4s	⁠ 1212	1212	0	0
	ubuntu-ruby-3_3-oj-false	699ms	⁠ 202	202	0	0
	ubuntu-ruby-3_3-oj-true	544ms	⁠ 202	202	0	0
	ubuntu-ruby-3_4-oj-false	773ms	⁠ 202	202	0	0
	ubuntu-ruby-3_4-oj-true	457ms	⁠ 202	202	0	0
	ubuntu-ruby-4_0-oj-false	525ms	⁠ 202	202	0	0
	ubuntu-ruby-4_0-oj-true	800ms	⁠ 202	202	0	0

Allure TestOps: Allure Ruby GitHub actions run (2026-11-03T11:51:59.742Z)

Artifacts used (6)

• allure-results-test-ruby-3.3-oj-false.zip
• allure-results-test-ruby-3.3-oj-true.zip
• allure-results-test-ruby-3.4-oj-false.zip
• allure-results-test-ruby-3.4-oj-true.zip
• allure-results-test-ruby-4.0-oj-false.zip
• allure-results-test-ruby-4.0-oj-true.zip

[andrcuns]

@epszaw One thing I'm noticing here in this PR, why do we show all tests as "new"? Is it because the summary table is always generated from the report, not testops, right?

If so, I think we should definitely look in to this, it will be incredibly confusing for anyone using this summary table in combination with testops. Completely unrelated to this change, just mentioning it before I forget 😄

[epszaw]

@epszaw One thing I'm noticing here in this PR, why do we show all tests as "new"? Is it because the summary table is always generated from the report, not testops, right?

If so, I think we should definitely look in to this, it will be incredibly confusing for anyone using this summary table in combination with testops. Completely unrelated to this change, just mentioning it before I forget 😄

The report history depends on Allure Service configuration, not the TestOps one. So, that's ok in this case, actually.

Most likely, we need to drop these columns from the summary if there's no resolved/configured history, I think.

What do you think?