> On Oct. 18, 2014, 12:50 a.m., Bill Farner wrote:
> > buildSrc/src/main/groovy/org/apache/aurora/CoverageReportCheck.groovy, line 
> > 46
> > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/26902/diff/1/?file=725107#file725107line46>
> >
> >     Should we be strict here and fail?
> 
> Joshua Cohen wrote:
>     You mean require the bar be raised? I'm fine with that. It'd be better if 
> it calculated both at once then so you didn't get two failed builds in a row 
> though...

Yeah, require.  I agree - tell the user what the values should be.


- Bill


-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/26902/#review57256
-----------------------------------------------------------


On Oct. 18, 2014, 12:26 a.m., Joshua Cohen wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/26902/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated Oct. 18, 2014, 12:26 a.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for Aurora, Kevin Sweeney and Bill Farner.
> 
> 
> Repository: aurora
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> Add a message when coverage exceeds minimum. This way we'll be sure to 
> continually raise the minimum threshold as we exceed it.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   buildSrc/src/main/groovy/org/apache/aurora/CoverageReportCheck.groovy 
> 390acf7c453f18fa968dd3ce60131fc7d80d69f6 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/26902/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> ./gradlew test
> 
> With values artificially set lower it outputs:
> 
> Instruction coverage of 0.87 exceeds min instruction coverage of 0.86, 
> consider raising the bar!
> Branch coverage of 0.82 exceeds min instruction coverage of 0.81, consider 
> raising the bar!
> 
> (we're at 0.8793488824101069 for instruction coverage, so close to bumping 
> that up).
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Joshua Cohen
> 
>

Reply via email to