Re: revised code coverage requirement
That’s a good question. But your explanation makes sense to me: when a new Sonar scan is run it probably overrides the result of the previous one, causing those counters to reset… Additionally, what is considered “new code”? Is a configuration file change seen as new code?
I’ll try to look for an explanation from my colleagues and come back to you when I got an answer (or maybe the LF knows?)
In the meantime, since the feature seems available in the tool, we might want to consider binding the “new code coverage” objective to the tool – in other words, if the feature is usable and gives what we expect, we could start monitoring it.
Would that make sense?
From: ZWARICO, AMY <az9121@...>
Sent: Wednesday, October 30, 2019 6:44 PM
To: Close, Pierre <pierre.close@...>; Pawlak Paweł 3 - Korpo <Pawel.Pawlak3@...>; onap-seccom@...
Subject: RE: revised code coverage requirement
I’ve used the sonar high level reports, but never drilled into detail. It looks as if we can look at metrics for new code. Pierre, are the numbers coming up 0 because we run the Sonar jobs as part of Jenkins?
I have updated the ticket with a link to Sonar coverage stats – this might help reach part of the coverage goals.
***Security Advisory: This Message Originated Outside of AT&T ***
Please review https://jira.onap.org/browse/REQ-207 updated based on feedback at the PTL call and discussion during the SECCOM meeting. I would like to finalize this requirement before the TSC call on Thursday 19/10/31.
Amy Zwarico, LMTS
Chief Security Office / Emerging Services Security
"This e-mail and any files transmitted with it are the property of AT&T, and are intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom this e-mail is addressed. If you are not one of the named recipient(s) or otherwise have reason to believe that you have received this message in error, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately from your electronic device. Any other use, retention, dissemination, forwarding, printing, or copying of this e-mail is strictly prohibited."