Closed DilumAluthge closed 4 years ago
Merging #249 into master will decrease coverage by
6.74%
. The diff coverage isn/a
.
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #249 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 90.31% 83.57% -6.75%
==========================================
Files 6 3 -3
Lines 351 140 -211
==========================================
- Hits 317 117 -200
+ Misses 34 23 -11
Impacted Files | Coverage Δ | |
---|---|---|
src/coveralls.jl | 81.08% <ø> (ø) |
:arrow_up: |
src/Coverage.jl | 100% <ø> (+1.86%) |
:arrow_up: |
src/codecovio.jl | 86.15% <ø> (ø) |
:arrow_up: |
Continue to review full report at Codecov.
Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact)
,ø = not affected
,? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 5f811e7...40597f5. Read the comment docs.
If the final verdict is that this PR is breaking, could the version be increased to 1.0.0?
This PR says nothing about the motivation for doing it...
We've registered the package CoverageCore.jl (https://github.com/JuliaCI/CoverageCore.jl).
CoverageCore has the functionality for processing the code coverage and memory allocation results. It only has one dependency (the LibGit2 stdlib); it has no non-stdlib dependencies. Thus, people that want to use the functionality of CoverageCore in their own packages can do so without needing to take on any additional dependencies.
Coverage.jl will continue to have the functionality for uploading coverage reports to Codecov.io and Coveralls.io.
However, now that we have CoverageCore, we have the same code duplicated in two places, which will be harder to maintain in the long run. So this PR simply removes the duplicated code that has already been moved to CoverageCore.
One place where this will be super helpful is the Julia VS Code extension: we could ship CoverageCore.jl and thus provide out of the box support for generating lcov files. We can’t do that with the current Coverage.jl because we can’t ship anything that has binary dependencies.
Bump.
It would be great to get as many eyes on this as possible.
I will leave this PR open for 2 more weeks, and then (assuming that nobody spots any bugs) will merge it.
My thought would be just giving it a more descriptive name perhaps. Perhaps CoverageIO or CoverageTools?
My thought would be just giving it a more descriptive name perhaps. Perhaps CoverageIO or CoverageTools?
Sure, we can rename CoverageCore
. I think CoverageTools
would be a good name.
Since CoverageCore
is already registered in the General registry, I just need to figure out the process for renaming it.
CoverageCore has been renamed to CoverageTools.
This PR factors out the core functionality of
Coverage.jl
to theCoverageTools.jl
package.Since this is a major change to a package that is used by many people, it would be good to get as many people as possible to review this PR.
Please note: since this is such a big change, I bumped the version number from
0.9.3
to1.0.0-DEV
, because I am not sure that nothing in this PR is breaking. However, the reviewers feel confident that this PR is not breaking, we can instead bump the version number from0.9.3
to0.9.4-DEV
.