Hi all,
After implementing BDD tests for setup.pm, our coverage % hasn't changed
the slightest. While I had serious doubts that the code coverage hadn't
changed, I left it alone, since we have lots of items to work on. OTOH, I'd
really like to see a coverage figure which resembles actual code test
On Sun, Jan 24, 2016 at 7:24 PM, Michael Richardson
wrote:
> David G wrote:
> > This was sort of my point too, I don't think it is worth the extra
> effort to
> > try and clean up the DB so tests can be re-run. Just drop the db and
> re-clone
> > it before rerunning the test. You don
Hi all,
As it turned out, using HTTP::Server::PSGI isn't too hard (I've got a
prototype running on my branch 'master-try-coverage'). However, the server
seems too simple for what we want from it: coverage testing slows the
server down, resulting in consistent failure on the coverage-testing-VM
(ho
Hi all,
After a full day of fiddling and trying, I've now merged two branches:
1. Use 'nginx' to serve static files and reverse-proxy requests for the app
server (reduces/eliminates the intermittent failures)
2. Stop using Starman as the app server while testing: change '.travis.yml'
and 'tools/
