Hi!
I just came across this coverage tool integration
https://coveralls.io/features and I immediately thought of this
thread. We would still have the problem of testing being a long job,
but I like the idea of having a notification per request saying if the
coverage is better or worse.
Cheers!
Ma
Hello all!
First off all thanks for such a great discussion. My main goal was to start
some conversation and to check if someone has some ideas about code
coverage and what would be next steps.
Mandatory check that I suggested is a shot in the dark right now, since
habits don't change that easily
IMHO, I like the idea in principle, data is important and certainly can
help us target some areas where the coverage is low.
So, I think it would be useful to have the report ... but I believe making
it mandatory as part of PRs would be too soon.
Before making it mandatory, I think we need to adj
It's all easy in words. The reality is just that we need incremental
builds, but the structure is too complex to be able to have them.
We can add test coverage but just as weekly or daily report.
Like jenkins build, except the usual maintainers, nobody will care.
Il gio 8 ott 2020, 10:38 Marc Ca
It does feel like a failing. For exactly the reason below - smaller leaf
components (of which there are many) and PRs (which are infinite into
the future) "get away" with weaker testing because of the weight of
historic coverage within the core elements. This is entropy at work and
something a
Hi,
We have lgtm.com integrated which helps a bit to check from time to time
but not on every PR since the Camel build is complex. However, I think a
weekly coverage report is not a bad idea, at least it would maybe help a
bit.
Regards,
Omar
On Thu, Oct 8, 2020 at 9:51 AM Maria Arias de Reyna Do
Hi,
In any case, maybe a nightly/weekly code coverage is useful to check
which parts of the code are less "tested" and we should put more
effort on them. Even if we can't do it by PR, it will show some light
on the current status of the code.
On Thu, Oct 8, 2020 at 9:30 AM Andrea Cosentino wrote
I don't think it is feasible. Nobody would do it. It's time consuming.
Il gio 8 ott 2020, 09:21 Djordje Bajić ha scritto:
> Hello Andrea, Jan,
>
> In that case, maybe PR reviewers can run tests locally on that branch and
> check? What do you guys think?
>
> - Djordje
>
> On Thu, 8 Oct 2020, 08:0
Hello Andrea, Jan,
In that case, maybe PR reviewers can run tests locally on that branch and
check? What do you guys think?
- Djordje
On Thu, 8 Oct 2020, 08:09 Andrea Cosentino, wrote:
> Hello,
>
> No, incremental build are not supported. The Camel build is too complex for
> that.
>
> Il giorn
Hello,
No, incremental build are not supported. The Camel build is too complex for
that.
Il giorno gio 8 ott 2020 alle ore 08:07 Djordje Bajić
ha scritto:
> Hi Jan!
>
> Yes i understand that tests are gonna last long. Idk if there is
> possibility to specify to run only tests for that particula
Hi Jan!
Yes i understand that tests are gonna last long. Idk if there is
possibility to specify to run only tests for that particular component or
project inside the camel?
On Wed, 7 Oct 2020, 21:09 Jan Bednář, wrote:
> Hi,
> It would be great IMO, but I think you need to actually run the test
Hi,
It would be great IMO, but I think you need to actually run the tests
for coverage report. We currently skip tests for github PR, because it
takes many hours to test whole codebase - these are running during
nightly build.
Dne 7.10.2020 v 15:08 Djordje Bajić napsal(a):
Hello fellow Camel
12 matches
Mail list logo
