[PATCH] Generate coverage analysis Report

[Cillian O'Donnell]

On Wed, 6 Jun 2018, 05:07 Vijay Kumar Banerjee, <vijaykumar9597 at gmail.com>
wrote:

> On Wed, 6 Jun 2018, 08:31 Joel Sherrill, <joel at rtems.org> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Jun 5, 2018, 9:54 PM Chris Johns <chrisj at rtems.org> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> On 31/5/18 6:44 am, Vijay Kumar Banerjee wrote:
>>> > On 31 May 2018 at 02:02, Joel Sherrill <joel at rtems.org <mailto:
>>> joel at rtems.org>>
>>> > wrote:
>>> >     On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 3:29 PM, Vijay Kumar Banerjee
>>> >     <vijaykumar9597 at gmail.com <mailto:vijaykumar9597 at gmail.com>>
>>> wrote:
>>> >
>>> >         On 31 May 2018 at 00:28, Joel Sherrill <joel at rtems.org
>>> >         <mailto:joel at rtems.org>> wrote:
>>> >             I may not understand correctly but there is test_run and
>>> >             coverage_run. Someone
>>> >             suggested making coverage_running an option to test_run.
>>> If that's
>>> >             what's being
>>> >             asked for, then I think doing it in a follow up patch is
>>> OK.
>>> >
>>> >             If that's the intended request, perhaps a ticket should be
>>> filed.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >         Sorry for all the confusion.
>>> >         This patch doesn't change the way test works. It only adds an
>>> option to run
>>> >         the coverage script. coverage_run just runs the
>>> coverage.coverage_run
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >     :) And I am saying if we want to have one test_run with an
>>> argument, do it as
>>> >     a future work iteration. File a ticket.
>>> >
>>> >     We need to get the code working on the master.
>>> >
>>> > Okay, we can keep that as a future work (I haven't thought about it
>>> though). :)
>>> > Getting it to work on master is our primary objective.
>>> >
>>>
>>> Was a ticket raised to removing 'coverage_run' and to use 'test_run'?
>>>
>>
>> I haven't seen tickets for any of the issues we identified.
>>
> was there supposed to be tickets for each issue?
>

So trawl back over the emails and make a ticket for anything that hasn't
been done, any suggestions for improvements related to the project. Include
things that might not be for gsoc but related to the project. They can
assigned to people and the priority determined after you've collected them
all.

>
>>> Chris
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
> devel mailing list
> devel at rtems.org
> http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.rtems.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20180606/0febc5a3/attachment-0002.html>