Skip to content

Integrate OpenCover and codecov.io for code coverage #1616

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merged
merged 8 commits into from
Mar 16, 2018

Conversation

sharwell
Copy link
Contributor

@sharwell sharwell commented Feb 26, 2018

This pull request demonstrates the work required to complete #1614. It needs to get cleaned up, and the core functionality needs to be incorporated into RepoToolset.

This pull request builds on #1608.

@codecov-io
Copy link

codecov-io commented Feb 26, 2018

Codecov Report

❗ No coverage uploaded for pull request base (master@8bbf749). Click here to learn what that means.
The diff coverage is n/a.

@@            Coverage Diff            @@
##             master    #1616   +/-   ##
=========================================
  Coverage          ?   92.94%           
=========================================
  Files             ?      711           
  Lines             ?   112995           
  Branches          ?     3197           
=========================================
  Hits              ?   105021           
  Misses            ?     7244           
  Partials          ?      730
Flag Coverage Δ
#debug 92.94% <ø> (?)

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 8bbf749...be3c133. Read the comment docs.

@sharwell sharwell changed the title [WIP] Unit test experiment [WIP] Code coverage proof of concept Feb 26, 2018
@sharwell sharwell force-pushed the codecov branch 4 times, most recently from ab33b46 to 9a8fc46 Compare February 27, 2018 18:42
@sharwell sharwell changed the title [WIP] Code coverage proof of concept Code coverage proof of concept Feb 27, 2018
@sharwell sharwell changed the title Code coverage proof of concept Integrate OpenCover and codecov.io for code coverage Feb 27, 2018
@@ -10,5 +14,119 @@
<EmbeddedResource Update="**\*.resx" GenerateSource="true" />
</ItemGroup>

<Import Project="$(RepoToolsetDir)Imports.targets" Condition="Exists('$(RepoToolsetDir)Imports.targets')" />
<ItemGroup>
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This adds significant amount of infrastructure code, which smells like something that should probably belong to RepoToolset, instead of individual repos? Are we planning to eventually move this code over?
@tmat is probably the correct person to review and comment on these changes.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

It needs to get cleaned up, and the core functionality needs to be incorporated into RepoToolset.

I should read the PR description properly :-). Are we planning to merge in this change and revert once the functionality is in RepoToolset or wait for a RepoToolset package with this functionality before cleaning and merging this PR?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I should read the PR description properly :-). Are we planning to merge in this change and revert once the functionality is in RepoToolset or wait for a RepoToolset package with this functionality before cleaning and merging this PR?

I would like to get it merged so we can get a better understanding of how this configuration of codecov.io works with our development process. Any tweaks we make can be included in dotnet/roslyn-tools#170 before it gets merged.

@sharwell sharwell merged commit 26d12d8 into dotnet:master Mar 16, 2018
@sharwell sharwell deleted the codecov branch March 16, 2018 22:07
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants