Code coverage for unit and integration tests
Nobody has claimed this yet.
- Dominant language
- Shell
- Stars
- 16
- Forks
- 16
- Avg merge
- 11h 11m
- Merged PRs (30d)
- 1
Description
Some repos have both unit and integration tests. And each produce code coverage.
Decide a standard for naming and processing the multiple sets of coverage reports so that they do not stomp on each other, but do provide a reading of the code coverage of each level of testing.
(note: acceptance tests are another level up - "external" - there is not currently any coverage measure for those)
Contributor guide
First steps
- Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
- Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
- Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
- Open a pull request that references the issue number.
Research direction
Start by reviewing how the repositories currently produce unit and integration coverage reports, then compare their naming and processing conventions. Define a standard that keeps the report sets separate while preserving coverage readings for each test level; acceptance or external-test coverage is out of scope.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Assessment
- Tech stack
- shell
- Domain
- testing
- Issue type
- Feature
- Difficulty
- 5/5
- Estimated time
- Over a week
- Activity status
- Stale
- Clarity
- Needs clarification
- Newbie friendliness
- 20/100