Hey, Now we have reports of code coverage in codecov.io. Code coverage is basically percentage of statements executed during tests comparing to all statements in a package. Right now 73% of pywkibot library is covered but only 10% of scripts are being tested. For more detailed report (per file) see this https://codecov.io/github/wikimedia/pywikibot-core. Note that Appveyor tests are not included in the report yet https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/244878.
Some steps that can make pywikibot test coverage better: * Write tests for scripts * site.py, page.py and pagegenerators.py have noticeable number of missing statements https://codecov.io/github/wikimedia/pywikibot-core/pywikibot?ref=84f5efd03d7fb86eafb6aae1a8af3e0a5cd85a66#sort=missing&dir=desc. We can write tests for them. * Try coverage suggestions https://codecov.io/github/wikimedia/pywikibot-core/features/suggestions?ref=84f5efd03d7fb86eafb6aae1a8af3e0a5cd85a66
Let's talk about how we can have better tests! Best
non-free
Il 10/10/2015 13:20, Amir Ladsgroup ha scritto:
Hey, Now we have reports of code coverage in codecov.io http://codecov.io. Code coverage is basically percentage of statements executed during tests comparing to all statements in a package. Right now 73% of pywkibot library is covered but only 10% of scripts are being tested. For more detailed report (per file) see this https://codecov.io/github/wikimedia/pywikibot-core. Note that Appveyor tests are not included in the report yet https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/244878.
Some steps that can make pywikibot test coverage better:
- Write tests for scripts
- site.py, page.py and pagegenerators.py have noticeable number of
missing statements https://codecov.io/github/wikimedia/pywikibot-core/pywikibot?ref=84f5efd03d7fb86eafb6aae1a8af3e0a5cd85a66#sort=missing&dir=desc. We can write tests for them.
- Try coverage suggestions
Let's talk about how we can have better tests! Best
pywikibot mailing list pywikibot@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/pywikibot
Yes, um, how hard would it be to generate these using not-non-free stuff?
https://wiki.python.org/moin/CodeCoverage pointed me to https://coverage.readthedocs.org/en/coverage-4.0.1/ which looked promising.
-- Legoktm
On 10/10/2015 12:51 PM, Ricordisamoa wrote:
non-free
Il 10/10/2015 13:20, Amir Ladsgroup ha scritto:
Hey, Now we have reports of code coverage in codecov.io http://codecov.io. Code coverage is basically percentage of statements executed during tests comparing to all statements in a package. Right now 73% of pywkibot library is covered but only 10% of scripts are being tested. For more detailed report (per file) see this https://codecov.io/github/wikimedia/pywikibot-core. Note that Appveyor tests are not included in the report yet https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/244878.
Some steps that can make pywikibot test coverage better:
- Write tests for scripts
- site.py, page.py and pagegenerators.py have noticeable number of
missing statements https://codecov.io/github/wikimedia/pywikibot-core/pywikibot?ref=84f5efd03d7fb86eafb6aae1a8af3e0a5cd85a66#sort=missing&dir=desc. We can write tests for them.
- Try coverage suggestions
Let's talk about how we can have better tests! Best
pywikibot mailing list pywikibot@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/pywikibot
pywikibot mailing list pywikibot@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/pywikibot
On Thu, Oct 15, 2015 at 9:46 AM, Legoktm legoktm.wikipedia@gmail.com wrote:
Yes, um, how hard would it be to generate these using not-non-free stuff?
https://wiki.python.org/moin/CodeCoverage pointed me to https://coverage.readthedocs.org/en/coverage-4.0.1/ which looked promising.
coverage is what is being used.
The travis jobs include a coverage report in the console output. The appveyor jobs (not yet merged) even provide .coverage and coverage.xml as downloadable artefacts.
codecov is only used to render the merged coverage data on a webpage for easy viewing, and linking to in discussions, proposals, etc.
See https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T74863 for more details, including options to get the raw coverage artefacts out of travis and stored somewhere that developers can freely access and render as html using the freely available tools that codecov is using.
-- John Vandenberg