code coverage

From: Daniel Black <daniel.subs_at_internode.on.net>
Date: Thu, 3 Dec 2009 08:20:18 +1100

On Thursday 03 December 2009 07:56:22 Murray S. Kucherawy wrote:
> On Thu, 3 Dec 2009, Daniel Black wrote:
> > On Thursday 03 December 2009 05:54:05 Murray S. Kucherawy wrote:
> >> What's the status of the test code coverage work you already started?
> >
> > pretty mature. The merge shouldn't be that bad. It needs a cvs copy of
> > lcov though to generate the HTML (bug in prev released version affects
> > us). It will be heaps cleaner now that tests are in a subdirectory.
>
> This is something that wouldn't be part of releases though, would it?

I don't imagine LCOV should be part of releases.

code coverage HTML - I'm in favor of leaving it there. Should we install it to
docdir? not sure.

> > How do you feel about putting the generated HTML on the opendkim.org
> > website After all test coverage should be a quality we are proud of and
> > our customers appreciate.
>
> I've got no problem with that, or with including a snapshot of our code
> coverage in the "docs" directory or something like that in each release.
>
happy either (or both) ways here.
Received on Wed Dec 02 2009 - 21:23:25 PST