Open Stack

Hi Rob

I agree. Enforcing a minimum level of coverage as a start is awesome.

I must add though keeping it at 100% and breaking the build has almost
never worked in practice for me.
Keeping a slightly lower level ~98% is slightly more pragmatic.
Also, the currently low coverages will have to be addressed as well.
Is there a blueprint that can be created to tackle it?

-Rajat


On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 6:33 AM, Rob Cresswell (rcresswe) <
rcresswe at cisco.com> wrote:

>  Hi all,
>
>  As far as I’m aware, we don’t currently enforce any minimum unit test
> coverage, despite Karma generating reports. I think as part of the review
> guidelines, it would be useful to set a minimum. Since Karma’s detection is
> fairly relaxed, I’d put it at 100% on the automated reports.
>
>  I think the biggest drawback is that the tests may not be “valuable”,
> but rather just meet the minimum requirements. I understand this sentiment,
> but I think that “less valuable” is better then “not present” and it gives
> reviewers a clear line to +1/ -1 a patch. Furthermore, it encourages the
> unit tests to be written in the first place, so that reviewers can then ask
> for improvements, rather than miss them.
>
>  Rob
>
> __________________________________________________________________________
> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20150722/ca6faee0/attachment.html>