The current status of each is: AAF – Need confirmation – Target is to reach 45% by end of El-Alto? What’s the current status today? = Line coverage 46.1%
Policy – Need clarification – what’s the current status and what’s the target plan for El-Alto = Line coverage 51.2% Portal - Need clarification – what’s the current status and what’s the target plan for El-Alto = Line coverage 21.7% On Thu, Aug 22, 2019 at 4:35 AM Catherine LEFEVRE < catherine.lefe...@intl.att.com> wrote: > Good morning Jim, > > > > Please find my feedback > > · CCSDK – +1 – great progress – keep going > > · AAF – Need confirmation – Target is to reach 45% by end of > El-Alto? What’s the current status today? > > · Policy – Need clarification – what’s the current status and > what’s the target plan for El-Alto > > · Portal - Need clarification – what’s the current status and > what’s the target plan for El-Alto > > · OOF - fgps - fgps is not being released in El Alto > > Need clarification. > > Will it be used for Frankfurt? Will the associated artifacts remove from > the OOF El Alto container? > > > > Many thanks & regards > > Catherine > > > > *From:* onap-tsc@lists.onap.org [mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org] *On > Behalf Of *Jim Baker > *Sent:* Monday, August 19, 2019 10:47 PM > *To:* onap-tsc <onap-tsc@lists.onap.org> > *Subject:* [onap-tsc] ONAP Sonar Waiver Requests > > > > Folks, Below are the set of waiver requests that I've collected for the El > Alto release. There is one more for Multicloud that we'll hear from at the > TSC. Please review these and ask any questions of the respective PTLs. I'll > ask for approval later this week. > > Jim > > > > = > > El Alto Sonar Waivers > CCSDK > > > > I need to request a waiver for the CCSDK ccsdk/dashboard repository. As > you know, this repository was at 69.1% coverage before javascript was > added. After javascript was added, coverage dropped to 16.9%. > > > > We have been able to get the line coverage on that repository up to > 41.5%. We are not likely to be able to improve further on that due to > resource limitations. Our plan would be to get back to 55% line coverage > in the Frankfurt release timeframe. Of course, if we can improve sooner, > we will, but at this time the best we can commit to would be Frankfurt. > > > > > AAF > > > > There is no real chance for AAF to increase its JUnits to 55% for El Alto > > The reasons for this are: > > · AAF has a very big resource shortage. > > o The only people contributing REAL code is Sai Gandham and I. There > are other Contributors, but they are just working Sonar reported "Concerns". > > o AT&T has only funded a ".8" person for ONAP, so, according to AT&T > rules, we can only spend 40% of our time on ONAP (though, frankly, I > contribute a lot more) > > o Sai will be on 3 weeks vacation soon > > o I am SUPPOSED to have Vacation soon. I have had no break this year > whatsoever. > > · AAF has massive ONAP required changes already in play > > o Release process has changed > > o There is a new Staging Process/env > > o OOM is being redone > > · Additionally, I am committed to improving Security for all ONAP > Apps > > o OUT of the "manual Cert" process > > o INTO the Auto-Gen of Configs and Certs at runtime > > o These two elements make ONAP MORE Secure by > > § NOT putting Certs in Repos > > § 2-way TLS Authentication is Configured in from the start > > § MORE Apps can move forward on Security, since they don't have to > understand > > · For that reason, I'm asking only to be working on IMPROVEMENT, > which may be 45%, but given our absences, it may be hard to promise 50%. > > · HOWEVER, also part of the Plan is that I have already undertaken > to figure out if there is a way to accelerate this work, even with 25-40% > Contractor to do the work. > > o I analyzed WHERE the code could really benefit from JUnits > > o Not surprisingly, all the people working so far we working "Low > Hanging Fruit". There's not much left at the bottom branches. > > o THEREFORE, I undertook to develop and demonstrate one of the HARDEST > areas to Junit, and while it took me more than a Day, I was able to > > § Develop an Inheritance Strategy and code REUSE strategy so that Good > Junits in the most important/least number of JUnits can be built faster and > more effectively > > § I found additional APIs in the JUnit tool which allows us to more > easily Isolate the DB, without losing access to the reusable Helper > Functions critical for AAF Use. > > § This strategy also provides MORE coverage of critical code per JUnit, > which should make percentages rise faster. > > § I already showed this to Sai, who will be utilizing when he's not on > vacation. > > > > I hope these plans will show a path forward that gets us out of JUnit > issues faster. > > > Policy > > > > Regarding the TSC call today and the policy/engine coverage dropping below > 55% due to Javascript coverage. > > > > We have assigned one SME resource to working on this as soon as he is free > from current requirements. There is a possibility other resources from Bell > Canada will be able to help. And we will see if others can jump in on it. > > > > The JIRA for this work is covered here: > https://jira.onap.org/browse/POLICY-1937 > <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__jira.onap.org_browse_POLICY-2D1937&d=DwMFaQ&c=LFYZ-o9_HUMeMTSQicvjIg&r=ZglJ8LOeAfevY7wWaSximhFMAzXaMdza5QYCg-DW6SU&m=ykFhkGFTGDY3dygGb6FaCe1kpXTDUaRbg5kE_mzwSkI&s=-rlQQ08kJcrlJ4NPSTpzpAwl_YJjgS2OKlNR8QGGs_I&e=> > > > > This repo has both Java and Javascript. > > · The Java coverage is >55%, but extremely difficult to move the > needle on this repo due to excessive cyclical complexity and nested > if-then-else and try-catch. > > · The Javascript coverage will require addition of maven plugins > to build the tests. So there will be some time to ramp up on the tool and > get that integrated. In addition, the javascript is GUI code so may be > difficult to build tests around it. > > > > Please be aware that this repo is legacy code and is scheduled to be > marked as read-only post-Frankfurt. Perhaps a waiver can be considered if > time runs out. > > > Portal > > Facts: > > · After enabling Javascript (JS) coverage, the portal's coverage > dropped from 72.9% to 21.6% - sonar link > <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__sonar.onap.org_dashboard-3Fid-3Dorg.onap.portal-3Aonap-2Dportal-2Dparent&d=DwMFaQ&c=LFYZ-o9_HUMeMTSQicvjIg&r=ZglJ8LOeAfevY7wWaSximhFMAzXaMdza5QYCg-DW6SU&m=ykFhkGFTGDY3dygGb6FaCe1kpXTDUaRbg5kE_mzwSkI&s=LyHPkcAlDMgxgdX4ZwV0KPdD91SKHgToZFAR5FlbFPE&e=> > . > > > > Quality: > > · The team had a deep dive into the source code of Portal and we > can see that the existing JUnit code covers most of critical > functionalities of backend java code (72.9%). > > · Also, the robotframework tests cover all the functionalities > end-to-end covering frontend and backend code. So I believe the quality of > source code is still in good shape. > > > > Risk/Benefit: > > · This is a huge drop, as the project contain good amount of > Javascript code. > > · The risk here is team may not achieve 55% coverage with JS in El > Alto – listed as risk here > <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__wiki.onap.org_display_DW_El-2DAlto-2BRisks&d=DwMFaQ&c=LFYZ-o9_HUMeMTSQicvjIg&r=ZglJ8LOeAfevY7wWaSximhFMAzXaMdza5QYCg-DW6SU&m=ykFhkGFTGDY3dygGb6FaCe1kpXTDUaRbg5kE_mzwSkI&s=Ssh8BVBFzdOWcemQjpcCvKODMqR_WrREorYA3VVnZPY&e=> > . > > > > Plan forward: > > · The team is planning to upgrade to latest Angular 6 which is in > Typescript (rather than in Javascript), along with this new upgrade. > > · The team will explore the test coverage process for typescript > code and request LF support to enable Typescript support in ONAP’s Sonar. > > · So, the recommendation is not to invest efforts in adding code > coverage for old JS code, rather invest in typescript code. > > · For El Alto, it is recommended to disable JS code coverage and > start enabling coverage for typescript code. > > · However, achieving 55% code coverage in new Typescript code is > aggressive for El Alto release. The team can target for Frankfurt release. > > > Optfra > > The repo not reaching Sonar goal is fgps - fgps is not being released in > El Alto - no waiver required. > > > > > > -- > > Jim Baker > > Linux Foundation Networking - Technical Program Manager > > mobile: +1 970 227 6007 > > > > -- Jim Baker Linux Foundation Networking - Technical Program Manager mobile: +1 970 227 6007 -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#5368): https://lists.onap.org/g/onap-tsc/message/5368 Mute This Topic: https://lists.onap.org/mt/32959988/21656 Group Owner: onap-tsc+ow...@lists.onap.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.onap.org/g/onap-tsc/leave/2743226/1412191262/xyzzy [arch...@mail-archive.com] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
