Better jcov integration

[Eric McCorkle]

I did manage to figure out why Jenkins wasn't highlighting the code.  It
seems that the "lines" fields in method entries need to also be
duplicated in the "class" entries.

The attached diff contains the changes.

On 02/28/2018 20:49, Eric McCorkle wrote:
> 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>
>>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: cobertura.diff
Type: text/x-patch
Size: 20860 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/code-tools-dev/attachments/20180301/e9a1440f/cobertura.diff>