search

relaycorp / awala-endpoint-android

High-level library for Android apps implementing Awala endpoints
Apache License 2.0
1 stars 1 forks source link

chore(CI): Restore jacocoTestCoverageVerification task #274

Closed Filmaluco closed 1 year ago

Filmaluco commented 1 year ago

closes: https://github.com/relaycorp/awala-endpoint-android/issues/5

I just put it to work, the rules seem a bit too much, maybe its time to add more coverage and lower the rules 😄

Filmaluco commented 1 year ago

Hi @gnarea, I will take a deep dive on the report and I will let u know if this needs further configuration, to avoid things like the previous issue with inline methods.

gnarea commented 1 year ago

Thanks @Filmaluco!

The most important thing here is just restoring that task, even if that means just using the coverage values we have today. We just don't have any record of why that was disabled in #3 -- I remember having the conversation but I can't remember why. So maybe the issue was caused by another dependency and it's already fixed.

I just want to make sure that the coverage doesn't continue to drop as we fix bugs and add features.

Filmaluco commented 1 year ago

then let's create a new task for updating these values and increasing the tests to our target number again, and close this one. @gnarea what u think?

gnarea commented 1 year ago

Sorry, but I still think the values in this PR defeat the purpose of checking coverage in the first place -- How is this better than keeping jacocoTestCoverageVerification disabled? I could add a new feature with zero tests and CI will still pass as long as I stay under those thresholds.

Again, the main thing I'd like to avoid is making things worse as we fix bugs and add new features. Padding the thresholds doesn't solve that.

One thing to bear in mind is that we can never get to 100% coverage in this library anyway because we're using two test sources (test and androidTest) -- some things can't be tested as plain old unit tests so they have to be instrumentation tests. So maybe the solution is to stick to what we have and close #5 as "won't fix"!? 😄

gnarea commented 1 year ago

Also, what's the problem with just setting the thresholds to whatever uncovered values we have today? That seems to me like a trivial way to restore code coverage whilst preventing further changes from decreasing coverage. Am I missing something here?

github-actions[bot] commented 1 year ago

:tada: This PR is included in version 1.12.17 :tada:

The release is available on GitHub release

Your semantic-release bot :package::rocket: