Better jcov integration

[Eric McCorkle]

I should mention that I noticed that Jenkins at least doesn't seem to
highlight the source in the coverage reports generated by the current
patch.

I'm going to look into it a bit more.

On 02/28/2018 15:20, Alexey Fedorchenko wrote:
> Hello, Eric!
> 
> Thank you for the report. I have added an issue for your request [1].
> We will address it, I also think that having more report formats is a
> good suggestion.
> 
> A few thoughts about the original problem of adding JCov to CI (Jenkins):
> - use html publisher plugin to show JCov html report
> - plot build data with plot plugin to look at the coverage trend for builds 
> ( it will require using grep and sed to get data from
> overview-summary.html to plot.csv )
> - create JCov plugin for Jenkins.
> 
> The latest item and Maven plugin opens a little bit bigger discussion
> for Code Tools projects:
> Could we have tool's plugins sources in tool’s repository?
> 
> Thank you.
> 
> [1] https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/CODETOOLS-7902125
> 
> —Alexey
> 
>> On Feb 28, 2018, at 4:42 AM, Eric McCorkle <eric at metricspace.net
>> <mailto:eric at metricspace.net>> wrote:
>>
>> Hello everyone,
>>
>> I recently found myself needing better integration of jcov into various
>> build/testing tools, so I did two things.  First, I modified the jcov
>> tool to generate a report in the Cobertura XML format, which is used by
>> Jenkins and other tools as an input format.  While these reports are
>> inferior in my opinion to the HTML reports jcov generates, they do allow
>> integration with other tools and CI systems.  Therefore, I think
>> providing this functionality would likely encourage more people to use
>> jcov over the alternatives.
>>
>> I've attached the patch for this modification here, if anyone would like
>> to review it.
>>
>>
>> I've also mostly wrangled the Maven plugin API to create a plugin for
>> using jcov in a Maven project (however, there is one remaining issue
>> with documentation generation that I need to correct before I call the
>> plugin "finished").  I'm not sure if that would be something that would
>> be added to codetools, if the group ID should be something like
>> "org.openjdk", or what else ought to be done about it.  I will gladly
>> contribute the code if there's a desire to adopt it.
>> <cobertura.diff>
>