Aggregated test coverage report per unit test class and process definition #202
Replies: 3 comments
-
There is a class report. If you place all tests for a specific workflow as test-methods into one class you will get the first l desired total report.
Stephan
BlueMail for Android herunterladen
Am 24. Feb. 2021, 09:10, um 09:10, berndvarga <notifications@github.com> schrieb:
…The generated reports is based on each test method.
I miss the overview, if all tasks and flows in an process definition is
tested.
Maybe an additional report should be generated, which aggregate the
test coverage based on test class and process definition?
Test1:
Process Definition Name: Xxx
Coverage: 81,8%
Test Class: XxxTest
Test Method: xxxStraightThrough
![image](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/72856476/108966693-c8197300-767e-11eb-9300-0ab2ef5958c6.png)
Test2:
Process Definition Name: Xxx
Coverage: 81,8%
Test Class: XxxTest
Test Method: xxxStartWithEvent
![image](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/72856476/108966991-352d0880-767f-11eb-8152-376fb5eb02c4.png)
Proposed aggregation:
Process Definition Name: Xxx
Coverage: 100%
Test Class: XxxTest
Test Methods: xxxStraightThrough xxxStartWithEvent
![image](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/72856476/108967299-a10f7100-767f-11eb-99a8-6aa324d60dc6.png)
My expectation is, that this will be a good enhancement.
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
#84
|
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
Okay, now I see my locally issue. The report is not generated, because I have multiple process definition in tests. If I remove all other deployments and unit test classes it works. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
So i have now investigate into it. The problem on my side, is that I use an extended test class, which contains the initialization of the unit test and this share the processengine and the test coverage staff. Class coverage can only be calculated if all tests deploy the same BPMN resources. expected:<[ProcessDefinitionEntity[usertaskevent:1:2903]]> but was:<[ProcessDefinitionEntity[XxxNavigationEventMain:1:4905], ProcessDefinitionEntity[XxxNavigationEventSub:1:4904]]> For me it would be helpful, if I can reset the TestCoverageProcessEngineRule in the AfterClass method for the next unit test class. Maybe such feature already exist, but I have not located it? |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
The generated reports is based on each test method.
I miss the overview, if all tasks and flows in an process definition is tested.
Maybe an additional report should be generated, which aggregate the test coverage based on test class and process definition?
Test1:
![image](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/72856476/108966693-c8197300-767e-11eb-9300-0ab2ef5958c6.png)
Process Definition Name: Xxx
Coverage: 81,8%
Test Class: XxxTest
Test Method: xxxStraightThrough
Test2:
![image](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/72856476/108966991-352d0880-767f-11eb-8152-376fb5eb02c4.png)
Process Definition Name: Xxx
Coverage: 81,8%
Test Class: XxxTest
Test Method: xxxStartWithEvent
Proposed aggregation:
![image](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/72856476/108967299-a10f7100-767f-11eb-99a8-6aa324d60dc6.png)
Process Definition Name: Xxx
Coverage: 100%
Test Class: XxxTest
Test Methods: xxxStraightThrough xxxStartWithEvent
My expectation is, that this will be a good enhancement.
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions