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 <vincent(a)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 <vincent(a)massol.net> wrote:
>
>
>
>> On 30 Jul 2018, at 12:39, Vincent Massol <vincent(a)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