aurora-reviews mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Aurora ReviewBot" <wfar...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Review Request 39089: Better handling of enums and constructor-only classes in test coverage check.
Date Wed, 07 Oct 2015 15:44:52 GMT

-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/39089/#review101770
-----------------------------------------------------------

Ship it!


Master (33d7e21) is green with this patch.
  ./build-support/jenkins/build.sh

I will refresh this build result if you post a review containing "@ReviewBot retry"

- Aurora ReviewBot


On Oct. 7, 2015, 3:31 p.m., Bill Farner wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/39089/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated Oct. 7, 2015, 3:31 p.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for Aurora and Maxim Khutornenko.
> 
> 
> Repository: aurora
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> I encountered this in another patch, where code coverage was required for a constant-only
utility class.  I think the new filters are simpler to understand and more appropriate.  As
indicated by the patch, it also pointed out some areas where test coverage is legitimately
lacking (we technically had coverage in the constructor, but no other methods).
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   buildSrc/src/main/groovy/org/apache/aurora/build/CoverageReportCheck.groovy b47175666159128a98f731e157d5a1eb936a94bb

>   config/legacy_untested_classes.txt 88a71dfc694e633bc91ae053d07286bed7fcd3ec 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/39089/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Bill Farner
> 
>


Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message