<quote name="Gabriel Wicke" date="2015-09-03" time="17:03:03 -0700">
In the services team, we found that prominent coverage metrics are a very powerful motivator for keeping tests in order. We have set up 'voting' coverage reports, which fail the overall tests if coverage falls, and make it easy to check which lines aren't covered yet (via coveralls). In all repositories we enabled this for, test coverage has since stabilized around 80-90%.
We (RelEng), too, are interested in this. Given the nature of our projects we'll probably need to start this on a case-by-case basis, (un)fortunately. :)
There's two parts to this (as I see it): informational and enforcement.
Informational: * "Generate code coverage reports for extensions" ** https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T71685 * Add ^^^ to "QA Health scoreboard" ** https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T108768
Enforcement: * What Gabriel described above. ** There's no one ticket for tracking this cross repos right now, I'll create one... ** https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T111546
Greg
PS: I didn't mean to, but I forked this thread across wikitech-l and qa lists (my bcc to wikitech-l didn't make it through mailman, I don't think). See the other sub-thread on adding @integration test runs on wmf deploy branch creation at: https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/qa/2015-September/thread.html