Hi Adam Well, there are many moving parts here:
1. Sonarqube report can easily be misleading: It got executed only on the `develop` - 0% coverage shows the last 30 days I believe, so in the last 30 days there was 0 unit test written. - In my understanding - but i might be wrong - sonarqube marks it as failed, if the metrics (coverage, bugs, duplication, etc.) got worse than before… 2. Since it got not executed on PRs automatically, we always know the outcome only after the merge whether it got better or worse… We can consider changing on this and add sonarqube metrics as one of the acceptance criteria of a PR. I dont know whether someone is reviewing actively, probably we should… at least before new release maybe? I hope it helps! Regards, Adam > On 2025. Jul 15., at 17:41, Adam Monsen <[email protected]> wrote: > > It looks like the sonarqube quality gate always fails. > > Something seems broken with the coverage metric. If you click "Show Older > Activity" at https://sonarcloud.io/project/overview?id=apache_fineract every > commit says "0.0% Coverage". > > I only see the main branch and no PRs at > https://sonarcloud.io/project/overview?id=apache_fineract . > > More broadly: I'm wondering if the sonarqube tool/integration is useful > and/or actually being used with/for Fineract. >
