On Sun, Sep 20, 2015 at 9:21 PM, Ben Caradoc-Davies <[email protected]> wrote:
> Andrea, > > are these rules based on coverage fraction or absolute lines covered? Is > coverage relative to cyclomatic complexity? > I think it's relative to the count of executable lines of code (e.g., excluding whitespace, comments, method and class declarations), but I could be wrong. > > -0 for rules that we never reduce code coverage. I can think of several > cases where it is quite acceptable to reduce coverage fraction, such as > fixing a leak by adding extra lines in a hard-to-cover catch block, or > disabling a failing test class or method to fix the build and preserve the > rest of the coverage. Given infinite time we can always add more tests ... > > It might be quite useful to have a coverage change report for every pull > request. There is no harm trying Coverall to see what it looks like. I am > only against the rule that we never allow coverage to be reduced. It might > be good to know if a module's coverage falls below 40%. > I am not sure we get that number at the pull request level, as far as I can see the pull request check only reports the overall coverage. Here is an example from a random OL pull request: [image: Inline image 1] The downside of not adding the check is that nobody will probably check the before/after code coverage value if it's not in your there, in your face. If we don't at least expose this check, maybe by not enforcing it, I have no interest in spending time hooking up coveralls, as nobody will go to the coveralls home page to check our coverage values, if they have to remember to do it. Just as a note, the 40% mark might be something we are still not reaching on modules that were already there when we added the minimum test coverage check for graduation. Also, there is nothing stopping a graduated module from going below that threshold, as we also have no check (the rule of "at least one test in a commit fights a bit that kind of degradation, but provides no assurance) > > In my view, coverage metrics fall into the same category as formatting > convention compliance and lack of compiler warnings: good to have but often > a pain in the arse when enforced by automated tools. > See above, we might not enforce it, but if it's not in people's face, it's not worth wasting time on Cheers Andrea -- == GeoServer Professional Services from the experts! Visit http://goo.gl/it488V for more information. == Ing. Andrea Aime @geowolf Technical Lead GeoSolutions S.A.S. Via Poggio alle Viti 1187 55054 Massarosa (LU) Italy phone: +39 0584 962313 fax: +39 0584 1660272 mob: +39 339 8844549 http://www.geo-solutions.it http://twitter.com/geosolutions_it *AVVERTENZE AI SENSI DEL D.Lgs. 196/2003* Le informazioni contenute in questo messaggio di posta elettronica e/o nel/i file/s allegato/i sono da considerarsi strettamente riservate. Il loro utilizzo è consentito esclusivamente al destinatario del messaggio, per le finalità indicate nel messaggio stesso. Qualora riceviate questo messaggio senza esserne il destinatario, Vi preghiamo cortesemente di darcene notizia via e-mail e di procedere alla distruzione del messaggio stesso, cancellandolo dal Vostro sistema. Conservare il messaggio stesso, divulgarlo anche in parte, distribuirlo ad altri soggetti, copiarlo, od utilizzarlo per finalità diverse, costituisce comportamento contrario ai principi dettati dal D.Lgs. 196/2003. The information in this message and/or attachments, is intended solely for the attention and use of the named addressee(s) and may be confidential or proprietary in nature or covered by the provisions of privacy act (Legislative Decree June, 30 2003, no.196 - Italy's New Data Protection Code).Any use not in accord with its purpose, any disclosure, reproduction, copying, distribution, or either dissemination, either whole or partial, is strictly forbidden except previous formal approval of the named addressee(s). If you are not the intended recipient, please contact immediately the sender by telephone, fax or e-mail and delete the information in this message that has been received in error. The sender does not give any warranty or accept liability as the content, accuracy or completeness of sent messages and accepts no responsibility for changes made after they were sent or for other risks which arise as a result of e-mail transmission, viruses, etc. -------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________ GeoTools-Devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geotools-devel
