I would have thought the bots would mostly be iterating on the code, but do you think the bots will become aware of the code coverage metrics too if we expose them? I'm not sure what we could do to prevent that.
On Fri, Oct 30, 2026 at 7:30 AM Robert Muir <[email protected]> wrote: > > Can we avoid big PRs with lots of code generated by bots? :) > > My experience is that the bots will generate even more completely > worthless tests to try to satisfy line coverage metrics / goals. Tests > that ... exercise the code but don't actually make any valuable > assertions. > > On Fri, Oct 30, 2026 at 6:17 AM Alan Woodward <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > I’ve been using a python script that combines our existing gradle coverage > > tool with https://github.com/Bachmann1234/diff_cover to highlight any new > > lines in a commit that aren’t covered by unit tests, which has been very > > helpful in finding untested corners of big PRs (especially useful when lots > > of code is generated by bots). It occurs to me that this would also be > > useful as an opt-in GitHub action, maybe triggered by a specific label > > being applied to a PR. What do people think? Keeping it opt-in would be > > important I think as the reports can be noisy, and of course not all > > coverage gaps really need to be filled. > > > > - Alan > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
