[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-5439?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14487338#comment-14487338
]
Uwe Schindler commented on LUCENE-5439:
---------------------------------------
I agree for jacoco. In Clover you have much more possibilities, so its also
quite nice that you have combined coverage. Because when looking at block join
module you see which calls are coming from Solr. As this is impossible with
Jacoco, I agree.
I also agree that we should keep Clover, it is much more fancy report-wise and
records much more information (like call counts, which are useful to find
hotspots) or from *where* the call is coming from. If it runs like 6 hours
nightly on jenkins, who cares? But we get more results. For quickly testing
coverage locally, a simple and fast ant task is much more useful.
> Add Jacoco option for Test Coverage
> -----------------------------------
>
> Key: LUCENE-5439
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-5439
> Project: Lucene - Core
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Reporter: Grant Ingersoll
> Assignee: Robert Muir
> Priority: Minor
> Fix For: Trunk, 5.2
>
> Attachments: LUCENE-5439.patch, LUCENE-5439.patch, LUCENE-5439.patch
>
>
> Jacoco (http://www.jacoco.org/) is a much cleaner and simpler to use code
> coverage tool than clover and additionally doesn't require having a third
> party license since it is open source. It also has nice Jenkins integration
> tools that make it incredibly easy to see what is and isn't tested. We
> should convert the Lucene and Solr builds to use Jacoco instead of Clover.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
