Started looking at xwiki-commons-extension-api by the way. On Thu, Aug 9, 2018 at 11:50 AM, Thomas Mortagne <thomas.morta...@xwiki.com> wrote: > This is probably because xwiki-commons-extension-api contains a lot of > what is closer to integration than unit tests. > > On Tue, Aug 7, 2018 at 6:07 PM, Vincent Massol <vinc...@massol.net> wrote: >> Note for Thomas (or whoever else is interested in improving the commons >> extension tests) there are plenty in >> >> ./xwiki-commons-core/xwiki-commons-extension/xwiki-commons-extension-api/target/pit-reports/201808071749/methods.json:pseudo-tested >> pseudo-tested >> pseudo-tested >> partially-tested >> partially-tested >> pseudo-tested >> pseudo-tested >> pseudo-tested >> pseudo-tested >> pseudo-tested >> partially-tested >> pseudo-tested >> pseudo-tested >> partially-tested >> pseudo-tested >> partially-tested >> pseudo-tested >> pseudo-tested >> pseudo-tested >> pseudo-tested >> pseudo-tested >> pseudo-tested >> pseudo-tested >> partially-tested >> partially-tested >> pseudo-tested >> pseudo-tested >> pseudo-tested >> pseudo-tested >> partially-tested >> pseudo-tested >> pseudo-tested >> pseudo-tested >> pseudo-tested >> pseudo-tested >> pseudo-tested >> pseudo-tested >> pseudo-tested >> partially-tested >> pseudo-tested >> pseudo-tested >> pseudo-tested >> pseudo-tested >> pseudo-tested >> pseudo-tested >> pseudo-tested >> pseudo-tested >> partially-tested >> pseudo-tested >> pseudo-tested >> pseudo-tested >> pseudo-tested >> pseudo-tested >> pseudo-tested >> pseudo-tested >> partially-tested >> partially-tested >> pseudo-tested >> partially-tested >> partially-tested >> partially-tested >> partially-tested >> partially-tested >> pseudo-tested >> pseudo-tested >> >> Fixing those should yield a good increase in both mutation score and test >> coverage. >> >> Thanks >> -Vincent >> >>> On 7 Aug 2018, at 18:05, Vincent Massol <vinc...@massol.net> wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>>> On 30 Jul 2018, at 12:39, Vincent Massol <vinc...@massol.net> wrote: >>>> >>>> Hi devs, >>>> >>>> It would be great if you could help improve our unit tests using >>>> Descartes. This is needed for the STAMP research project >>>> (https://www.stamp-project.eu/view/main/) and will benefit XWiki by having >>>> 2 effects: >>>> * increasing the test coverage >>>> * improving the tests themselves (increasing their mutation score) >>>> >>>> Since 10.7 is 50% testing and 50% BFD, it would be great if you could >>>> spend all or a substantial part of your testing time working on this. >>>> >>>> I propose the following strategy: >>>> * You find a module you want to work on. >>>> * In that module you run: mvn clean install -Pquality >>>> -Dxwiki.pitest.skip=false >>> >>> You can also run that at the top of a multimodule project and then find >>> pseudo/partially tested methods with: >>> >>> find . -name "methods.json" -exec egrep -oH >>> "pseudo-tested|partially-tested" {} \; >>> >>> Thanks >>> -Vincent >>> >>>> * Then you check target/pit-reports/<date>/issues/index.html and verify if >>>> there are "pseudo tested" methods listed (when we have finished fixing all >>>> of those we can move to “partially tested methods”). >>>> * If there are some, then please record the current jacoco threshold and >>>> the current mutation score. >>>> * You can get the jacoco threshold by running "mvn clean install -Pquality >>>> -Dxwiki.pitest.skip=false -Dxwiki.pitest.mutationThreshold=100” (or by >>>> checking target/pit-reports/<date>/index.html, I haven’t checked yet if >>>> they are the same). >>>> * You can get the current mutation score by checking >>>> target/pit-reports/<date>/index.html >>>> * Then fix the test so that Descartes doesn’t report any pseudo tested or >>>> partially tested methods >>>> * Update the jacoco threshold and the mutation scores in the pom.xml >>>> * Send a PR on >>>> https://github.com/STAMP-project/descartes-usecases-output/tree/master/xwiki >>>> using the format already defined there. >>>> >>>> WDYT? Doable? >>>> >>>> Thanks >>>> -Vincent >> > > > > -- > Thomas Mortagne
-- Thomas Mortagne
