On 14 May 2018, at 13:48, Marius Dumitru Florea <[email protected]> wrote:
[snip]
** Find new packages introduced that have a TPC < the average computed
TPC
What is the average computed TPC currently?
It’s about 70%, see for example: http://maven.xwiki.org/site/clover/20180511/clover- commons+rendering+platform-20180511-0147/dashboard.html
Requiring 70% TPC for new packages is a nice goal but I find it hard to achieve in practice.
Two points on this:
* We should have above 80-90%+ in practice for new modules, not 70%. If we have 70% or less we can be sure you did a bad job on quality and that you’re impacting the overall quality of XWiki.
*should* but I don't think it happens in practice, for various reasons, mainly due to limited time. Did you check the TPC of the last 10 new packages? Is it above 70%?
I’ll check it. Thanks -Vincent
* For some modules, it makes less sense or it’s harder to have unit tests and integration tests are better. We’re not talking about 70% of unit test coverage but 70%+ coverage of overall testing (unit, integration, functional).
Now we’ll need to put in place to see it in action and verify if there are cases where this can be hard to achieve. But I’d prefer that we consider those cases as exceptional and handle them in an ad-hoc manner.
** 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
I would add:
** find the packages that have the TPC higher than what is declared in the pom (because we don't always update the TPC value declared in the pom when we refactor the code or when we add new tests)
Yes I agree. We should do that but not in the pipeline for the global coverage. We should have another pipeline for this and update the pom.xml files in it.
* 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 [email protected] with
details
and a link to the saved report * 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 the 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?
@Marius: what about this question? Would you be ok with it? :)
Sure.
ok cool
Thanks -Vincent
Thanks -Vincent
Thanks -Vincent