[GeoNode-devel] About suggestion to switch between Coveralls or Codecov

Tue Oct 31 11:11:57 PDT 2017

+1 to move to codecov

Many thanks Rizky

Francesco

Il 31 ott 2017, 11:16 +0100, Alessio Fabiani <alessio.fabiani at geo-solutions.it>, ha scritto:
> +1
>
> I like very much codecov and I would prefer that one on GeoNode 2.7+ at least.
>
> Regards,
> Alessio Fabiani
> ==
> GeoServer Professional Services from the experts! Visit http://goo.gl/it488V for more information.
> ==
>
> Ing. Alessio Fabiani
> @alfa7691
> Founder/Technical Lead
>
> GeoSolutions S.A.S.
> Via di Montramito 3/A
> 55054  Massarosa (LU)
> Italy
> phone: +39 0584 962313
> fax:     +39 0584 1660272
> mob:   +39 331 6233686
>
> http://www.geo-solutions.it
> http://twitter.com/geosolutions_it
>
> -------------------------------------------------------
> AVVERTENZE AI SENSI DEL D.Lgs. 196/2003
> Le informazioni contenute in questo messaggio di posta elettronica e/o nel/i file/s allegato/i sono da considerarsi strettamente riservate. Il loro utilizzo è consentito esclusivamente al destinatario del messaggio, per le finalità indicate nel messaggio stesso. Qualora riceviate questo messaggio senza esserne il destinatario, Vi preghiamo cortesemente di darcene notizia via e-mail e di procedere alla distruzione del messaggio stesso, cancellandolo dal Vostro sistema. Conservare il messaggio stesso, divulgarlo anche in parte, distribuirlo ad altri soggetti, copiarlo, od utilizzarlo per finalità diverse, costituisce comportamento contrario ai principi dettati dal D.Lgs. 196/2003.
> The information in this message and/or attachments, is intended solely for the attention and use of the named addressee(s) and may be confidential or proprietary in nature or covered by the provisions of privacy act (Legislative Decree June, 30 2003, no.196 - Italy's New Data Protection Code).Any use not in accord with its purpose, any disclosure, reproduction, copying, distribution, or either dissemination, either whole or partial, is strictly forbidden except previous formal approval of the named addressee(s). If you are not the intended recipient, please contact immediately the sender by telephone, fax or e-mail and delete the information in this message that has been received in error. The sender does not give any warranty or accept liability as the content, accuracy or completeness of sent messages and accepts no responsibility  for changes made after they were sent or for other risks which arise as a result of e-mail transmission, viruses, etc.
>
> > On Tue, Oct 31, 2017 at 11:12 AM, Rizky Maulana Nugraha <rizky at kartoza.com> wrote:
> > > Hi everyone,
> > >
> > > Following our discussion here: https://github.com/GeoNode/geonode/pull/3378 about Codecov, I would like to explain a little bit more about Codecov.
> > >
> > > Codecov.io is a coverage reporting tools, similar with coveralls.io.
> > > The reason why I propose to switch to codecov is the ability to report on aggregate coverage.
> > > This ability and reason is further described here: https://github.com/GeoNode/geonode/issues/3362
> > >
> > > In summary:
> > > Kartoza is trying to push QGIS Server backend functionality upstream. This allows GeoNode to communicate with QGIS Server Backend (as its OGC Backend).
> > > We are just trying to provide an alternative backend and not replacing GeoServer, so when you use GeoServer, you can’t use QGIS Server backend, and the other way around.
> > > GeoServer backend is also a lot more mature and deeply integrated with GeoNode, so there are many functionalities in GeoServer that QGIS Server doesn’t have yet.
> > > With this in mind, we propose that we configure a paralellized CI job to run unittests on Travis, each for GeoServer and QGIS Server.
> > > These configuration will run GeoNode unittests with GeoServer as a backend, and also run GeoNode unittests with QGIS Server as a backend.
> > > When each job is completed, the coverage on each job will obviously report code coverage related with each backend only.
> > > In other words, job for GeoServer will not cover codes for QGIS Server and the other way around.
> > > This makes coveralls report a significantly lower coverage for both, and the one that will be shown on the badge is coming from the last job.
> > > Coveralls also doesn’t support aggregate coverage (AFAIK at the time we wrote codes for QGIS Server backend), more details can be seen on this old issue:
> > > https://github.com/lemurheavy/coveralls-public/issues/613
> > > This is the main reason why we propose to switch to codecov. Codecov are able to aggregate the coverage report from each build job, so we get the total coverage.
> > >
> > > However, today after a little bit of research, I found out that now coveralls also support parallel build. We can see it here: http://docs.coveralls.io/parallel-build-webhook
> > > But I haven’t tried this one because I’m not aware of it exists previously before switching to codecov. We can also try this one but I didn’t have access to REPO_TOKEN.
> > >
> > > So, in this email I just want to let other developer know of the situations and options. We can discuss what the dev community prefers.
> > > For myself, I’m fine with either way, as long as it can support aggregate coverage.
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > --
> > > Rizky Maulana Nugraha
> > > Software Developer
> > > rizky at kartoza.com
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > geonode-devel mailing list
> > > geonode-devel at lists.osgeo.org
> > > https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/geonode-devel
> > >
>
> _______________________________________________
> geonode-devel mailing list
> geonode-devel at lists.osgeo.org
> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/geonode-devel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/geonode-devel/attachments/20171031/b7d47c32/attachment.html>