Mailing-List: contact cloudstack-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
Received-SPF: neutral (athena.apache.org: local policy)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: 
 <CA+96GG7v3-xqXvzATHeY2Uno4don3NiX4etVvZhFobgr9ZD_dw@mail.gmail.com>
References: 
 <CA+96GG7v3-xqXvzATHeY2Uno4don3NiX4etVvZhFobgr9ZD_dw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2012 12:03:36 -0500
Message-ID: 
 <CA+96GG7mu3TrMM6Qt+mJAAf9OTEQTKYg94Aw41-h7pWX7uBrbA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Preference for a JUnit Coverage Tool?
From: Chip Childers <chip.childers@sungard.com>
To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 5:02 PM, Chip Childers
<chip.childers@sungard.com> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Given our common agreement that we want to increase unit test coverage
> in the project, I started down the path of trying to get a coverage
> report generation process going.  Then I realized I should ask the
> list if there is a preference for tools.
>
> Does anyone have a preference?
>
> I've looked at emma [1] and cobertura [2] so far.
>
> -chip
>
> [1] http://search.maven.org/#artifactdetails%7Cemma%7Cemma%7C2.1.5320%7Cjar
> [2] http://search.maven.org/#artifactdetails%7Ccobertura%7Ccobertura%7C1.9rc1%7Cjar

Thanks for the input folks.  It looks like cobertura may be the best
bet, since it's available as a plugin on builds.a.o, as well as being
embedded in sonar.

Emma is pretty light weight, but doesn't look as active.  Clover is
great too, but isn't actually open source itself (and therefore would
require going through some hoops to get it up and running).

-chip