> On 11 May 2018, at 15:38, Thomas Mortagne <thomas.morta...@xwiki.com> wrote: > > On Thu, May 10, 2018 at 9:03 PM, Vincent Massol <vinc...@massol.net> wrote: >> Hi devs, >> >> Our current Test coverage strategy is to fail the build when new code added >> results in a coverage lower than the threshold for the module, using jacoco. >> >> This has 2 limitations causing our global TPC to go down from time to time >> (see https://markmail.org/message/hqumkdiz7jm76ya6 ). >> >> Thus I’d like to propose the following addition to our strategy: >> >> * We already have a jenkins pipeline to automatically compute the full TPC >> using Clover. See >> http://dev.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Community/Testing#HUsingClover2BJenkins >> * Make it run more often (it’s currently executed once per month, see >> http://ci.xwiki.org/view/Tools/job/Clover/). Takes abll out 5-6 hours to >> execute. Thus we could run it once per week or even once per day during the >> night. >> * Add some groovy logic in the pipeline to perform an analysis after the >> Clover report has been generated. Perform 2 checks by comparing the previous >> report with the one that just executed: >> ** Find new packages introduced that have a TPC < the average computed TPC >> ** Find packages and/or files having a TPC lower than the previous TPC >> ** Find removed packages that had a TPC higher than the average computed TPC > > "comparing the previous report" won't work if we run this every days, > it means you just have to wait 24h and the current report will be all > green :) > > It should be compared to a specific report (or even several) like > comparing to the current LTS branch report and to the report produced > after the previous master release.
Yes I thought about that too. It actually works but you need to handle past reports and not discard them, which I agree can be a problem especially if you want to have a failing job (see below). I thought about having a file that we generate in the pipeline script and put in http://maven.xwiki.org/site/clover/ which will contain the directory name for the last good Clover report (i.e the last report having a global TPC higher than the previous one). It’s not perfect either but maybe good enough to start with. The problem is not reacting fast enough and accumulating too many changes and keeping a failing TPC check forever. > >> * Save a report in the directory for the Clover report at >> http://ci.xwiki.org/view/Tools/job/Clover/ >> * For all failures, send an email to notificati...@xwiki.org with details >> and a link to the saved report > > Will we also see a build in error in the ci.xwiki.org home page ? Not > sure a notificati...@xwiki.org mail only would be enough :) Yes I agree. It’s easy to make the Clover job fail though so we can do that. Now ATM I don’t think the Clover appears in the “Recommended Failing” view so we would just need to add it and we’ll be good. > >> * Ideally, and if we can do it, call the github API to find the authors of >> commits for those packages and add them in the report. Examples of APIs we >> could use: >> ** >> https://api.github.com/repos/xwiki/xwiki-platform/commits?since=2018-05-07T00:00:00Z&until=2018-05-10T00:00:00Z >> (there’s a path parameter that could be used to filter but I don’t think >> it’ll work >> ** >> https://github.com/xwiki/xwiki-platform/compare/master@%7B2018-05-07%7D...master@%7B2018-05-10%7D >> (the committers/authors need to be extracted from the HTML which is a bit >> fragile) >> * Add a step in th e Release process to ensure that the global TPC has not >> been lowered. This would be a way to ensure we pay attention to that and fix >> it when we lower it. We would need to tune this to find something that helps >> keep the TPC increasing while not putting too much pressure at the same time >> on the release date. It doesn’t have to be in the release process but we >> need some checkpoint to make sure we look at it and that all devs fix the >> tests when they lower the global TPC, or at the very least that an analysis >> is done in case where it’s hard to keep the TPC (for example, removing >> existing code that had a lot of tests will lower the TPC ;)). >> >> WDYT? >> >> As a dev, would you be willing to pay attention to not lower the global TPC >> and work to fix it when it happens? >> >> Thanks >> -Vincent >> > > Sounds OK. Cool. What about other devs? :) Thanks -Vincent > > -- > Thomas Mortagne
