Github user mfenes commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/zookeeper/pull/443#discussion_r163670562
--- Diff: build.xml ---
@@ -1406,50 +1410,53 @@
xmlns:cs="antlib:com.puppycrawl.tools.checkstyle.ant">
<target name="test-core" depends="test-core-java, test-core-cppunit"/>
+ <target name="test-coverage-java">
--- End diff --
Because the "clover" target does not generate the HTML and XML reports.
It's used to initialise and setup Clover and it's called as a dependency of
"compile" to instrument source code.
I think declaring a "test-coverage-java" target to run Clover does not mean
"coverage" == clover. The fact that it currently calls "test-core-java" and
"generate-clover-reports" does not mean that we would not allow anybody to
add/use other code coverage tools here.
The reason behind the naming was that I'm also planning to add C code
coverage tests, and following the already existing ant target names
"test-core-java" and "test-core-cppunit" as naming patterns, there could be
targets "test-coverage-java" and "test-coverage-cppunit" to generate coverage
reports for Java and C, respectively.
Their parent target could be "test-coverage", which would run
"test-coverage-java" and "test-coverage-cppunit" to prepare a complete coverage
report for both Java and C.
Then running a full coverage report for ZK would be as simple as running
"test-coverage".
Please let me know what you think.
---
