code coverage in CI

[boneskull]

CodeClimate or Codacy or Coveralls. Or some combination thereof. Thoughts, preferences?

cc @mochajs/core

[dasilvacontin]

I have only used Coveralls so I'm probably biased.

On 03 Jul 2016, at 22:49, Christopher Hiller notifications@github.com wrote:

CodeClimate or Codacy or Coveralls. Or some combination thereof. Thoughts, preferences?

cc @mochajs/core

—
You are receiving this because you are on a team that was mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or mute the thread.

[TimothyGu]

I've used both Coveralls and Codecov, and in my experiences Codecov is much more polished and stable. Check Codecov vs Coveralls.

One common bug of Coveralls is that it always shows in the PR build status menu that the tests are running, even though Travis CI has already finished. When we were renaming Jade to Pug, Coveralls offered a button to transfer the coverage history over, but apparently that button doesn't work at all. Coveralls server was down pretty often when we started using it, so we had to place the upload command in after_success so it doesn't affect the main Travis build status.

Codecov is generally better integrated with Travis CI, and it supports showing results from multiple Travis runs. It also has some cool features like coverage comparison of branches, though I've never used that.

One thing Coveralls does but Codecov doesn't is that it shows the number of hits of a specific line, though I'm not sure if it's that helpful.

Code Climate has things other than code coverage like linting that might be useful, though we already do linting in Travis. I've only had experiences with Code Climate but Codacy looks generally the same.

[drazisil]

#1870 is related to this :)

[kunagpal]

As far as code coverage tracking goes, this has already been done, as can be seen here. This issue should be closed.

[boneskull]

@kungapal good catch