CHANGE: Re-enable tvOS tests in CI

[Pauliusd01]

Description

TvOS tests were unstable and disabled for a fairly long time, the code causing the instabilities is fixed by UUM-72211. So It should be fine to re-enable them. ISX-2144

Testing status & QA

Re-ran the tests a few times without failure

Overall Product Risks

Please rate the potential complexity and halo effect from low to high for the reviewers. Note down potential risks to specific Editor branches if any.

• Complexity: Low
• Halo Effect: Low

Checklist

Before review:

• Changelog entry added.
  • Explains the change in Changed, Fixed, Added sections.
  • For API change contains an example snippet and/or migration example.
  • JIRA ticket linked, example (case %%). If it is a private issue, just add the case ID without a link.
  • Jira port for the next release set as "Resolved".
• Tests added/changed, if applicable.
  • Functional tests Area_CanDoX, Area_CanDoX_EvenIfYIsTheCase, Area_WhenIDoX_AndYHappens_ThisIsTheResult.
  • Performance tests.
  • Integration tests.
• Docs for new/changed API's.
  • Xmldoc cross references are set correctly.
  • Added explanation how the API works.
  • Usage code examples added.
  • The manual is updated, if needed.

During merge:

• Commit message for squash-merge is prefixed with one of the list:
  • NEW: ___.
  • FIX: ___.
  • DOCS: ___.
  • CHANGE: ___.
  • RELEASE: 1.1.0-preview.3.

After merge:

• Create forward/backward port if needed. If you are blocked from creating a forward port now please add a task to ISX-1444.

[codecov-github-com]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

@@           Coverage Diff            @@
##           develop    #2197   +/-   ##
========================================
  Coverage    68.11%   68.12%           
========================================
  Files          367      367           
  Lines        53629    53629           
========================================
+ Hits         36529    36534    +5     
+ Misses       17100    17095    -5     

Flag	Coverage Δ
linux_2021.3_pkg	5.46% <ø> (ø)
linux_2021.3_project	70.37% <ø> (ø)
linux_2022.3_pkg	5.23% <ø> (ø)
linux_2022.3_project	65.21% <ø> (ø)
linux_6000.0_pkg	5.24% <ø> (ø)
linux_6000.0_project	68.02% <ø> (+<0.01%)	⬆️
linux_6000.1_pkg	5.24% <ø> (ø)
linux_6000.1_project	68.01% <ø> (ø)
linux_6000.2_pkg	5.24% <ø> (ø)
linux_6000.2_project	68.01% <ø> (ø)
linux_trunk_pkg	5.24% <ø> (ø)
linux_trunk_project	68.01% <ø> (ø)
mac_2021.3_pkg	5.45% <ø> (ø)
mac_2021.3_project	70.38% <ø> (ø)
mac_2022.3_pkg	5.23% <ø> (ø)
mac_2022.3_project	65.24% <ø> (ø)
mac_6000.0_pkg	5.23% <ø> (ø)
mac_6000.0_project	68.03% <ø> (ø)
mac_6000.1_pkg	5.23% <ø> (ø)
mac_6000.1_project	68.03% <ø> (-0.01%)	⬇️
mac_6000.2_pkg	5.23% <ø> (ø)
mac_6000.2_project	68.03% <ø> (ø)
mac_trunk_pkg	5.23% <ø> (ø)
mac_trunk_project	68.03% <ø> (ø)
win_2021.3_pkg	5.45% <ø> (ø)
win_2021.3_project	70.45% <ø> (ø)
win_2022.3_pkg	5.23% <ø> (ø)
win_2022.3_project	65.31% <ø> (+<0.01%)	⬆️
win_6000.0_pkg	5.24% <ø> (ø)
win_6000.0_project	68.11% <ø> (+<0.01%)	⬆️
win_6000.1_pkg	5.24% <ø> (ø)
win_6000.1_project	68.12% <ø> (+0.01%)	⬆️
win_6000.2_pkg	5.24% <ø> (ø)
win_6000.2_project	68.10% <ø> (ø)
win_trunk_pkg	5.24% <ø> (ø)
win_trunk_project	68.10% <ø> (+<0.01%)	⬆️

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

see 1 file with indirect coverage changes

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

[jfreire-unity]

@Pauliusd01 do we still want this to be merged?

[Pauliusd01]

@Pauliusd01 do we still want this to be merged?

I think I was spooked by iOS failures (back when it wasn't clear It's an instability) but it might be fine to merge, will take another look a bit later