commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Gary Gregory <garydgreg...@gmail.com>
Subject [parent][all] JaCoCo vs. Cobertura
Date Wed, 22 May 2013 16:52:33 GMT
Hi All:

[parent] version 29 replaces Cobertura with Jacoco, the main reasoning from
the folks over at [math] being that Jacoco is very fast compared to
Cobertura. In the case of [math] it's hours vs. minutes.

The problem is that Jacoco produces bogus results as I recently emailed
about the [io] component. The large portion of the code is reported with 0%
coverage which is completely wrong. This is apparently a known issue due to
the Jacoco use of 'probes' to analyze code which is not compatible with the
use of exceptions.

If you get the latest from [io] and edit the POM to enable JaCoC, you can
compare both reports in the generated site with 'mvn clean site'.

Fast and bogus is not better than slow and right.

I propose we switch [parent] back to Cobertura until a better alternative
is proposed. [math] can decide if it can live with the fast and bad results
provided by Jacoco.

Gary

-- 
E-Mail: garydgregory@gmail.com | ggregory@apache.org
Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition<http://www.manning.com/bauer3/>
JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/>
Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/>
Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
Home: http://garygregory.com/
Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory

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