Re: False coverage decrease accusations by Coveralls

2019-07-03 Thread Gilles Sadowski
Hello. Le mer. 3 juil. 2019 à 13:56, Heinrich Bohne a écrit : > > It is very strange indeed, because the last time this happened, the > reported change in coverage percentage was also wrong, so I initially > assumed that the -0.03% report for this pull request time was false too. > Actually, I'm

[VOTE][RESULT] Release Apache Commons Text 1.7 based on RC1

2019-07-03 Thread Gary Gregory
This VOTE passes with the following binding +1 votes: - Rob Tompkins chtom...@gmail.com - Gary Gregory garydgreg...@gmail.com - Pascal Schumacher pascalschumac...@gmx.net Gary On Wed, Jul 3, 2019 at 7:12 AM Pascal Schumacher wrote: > + 1 > > Am 30. Juni 2019 16:28:45 MESZ schrieb Gary Gregory

Re: False coverage decrease accusations by Coveralls

2019-07-03 Thread Heinrich Bohne
It is very strange indeed, because the last time this happened, the reported change in coverage percentage was also wrong, so I initially assumed that the -0.03% report for this pull request time was false too. Actually, I'm still not entirely convinced that it isn't false, because in the summary

Re: False coverage decrease accusations by Coveralls

2019-07-03 Thread Alex Herbert
On 03/07/2019 12:00, Heinrich Bohne wrote: I think we are talking about two completely different issues here. I am aware that 2 of my newly introduced lines (the IllegalArgumentException cases you mentioned) are not covered. These are argument validations inside private methods, so they should

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Commons Text 1.7 based on RC1

2019-07-03 Thread Pascal Schumacher
+ 1 Am 30. Juni 2019 16:28:45 MESZ schrieb Gary Gregory : >We have fixed quite a few bugs and added some significant enhancements >since Apache Commons Text 1.6 was released, so I would like to release >Apache Commons Text 1.7. > >Apache Commons Text 1.7 RC1 is available for review here: >http

Re: False coverage decrease accusations by Coveralls

2019-07-03 Thread Heinrich Bohne
so my pull request did uncover these lines in BigFraction.toString(), contrary to what the Coverall report says. Excuse me, of course it should be "my pull request did *not* uncover these lines" On 7/3/19 1:00 PM, Heinrich Bohne wrote: I think we are talking about two completely different iss

Re: False coverage decrease accusations by Coveralls

2019-07-03 Thread Heinrich Bohne
I think we are talking about two completely different issues here. I am aware that 2 of my newly introduced lines (the IllegalArgumentException cases you mentioned) are not covered. These are argument validations inside private methods, so they should never be reached, as you correctly assumed. W

Re: False coverage decrease accusations by Coveralls

2019-07-03 Thread Alex Herbert
On 03/07/2019 10:35, Heinrich Bohne wrote: But the detailed report you linked to is exactly where I got the information about what existing lines have (purportedly) been uncovered from. It's true that the master branch changed in the meantime, but those commits only concerned formatting and chang

Re: False coverage decrease accusations by Coveralls

2019-07-03 Thread Heinrich Bohne
But the detailed report you linked to is exactly where I got the information about what existing lines have (purportedly) been uncovered from. It's true that the master branch changed in the meantime, but those commits only concerned formatting and changing the field serialVersionUID in BigFractio

Re: False coverage decrease accusations by Coveralls

2019-07-03 Thread Alex Herbert
> On 3 Jul 2019, at 09:38, Heinrich Bohne wrote: > > So this is the second time this happens to me. I've submitted a pull > request ( https://github.com/apache/commons-numbers/pull/63 ), and the > Coveralls reports says that several existing lines have been uncovered, > which is a lie, because

Re: [CSV] Release again

2019-07-03 Thread Alex Herbert
> On 3 Jul 2019, at 09:18, Hoa Phan wrote: > > +1 Please can you state what you are voting for. A new release or each of my proposals to fix bugs before the release. > > Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android > > On Wed, Jul 3, 2019 at 18:13, Alex Herbert wrote: > > >> On 15 Jun 2019, at

False coverage decrease accusations by Coveralls

2019-07-03 Thread Heinrich Bohne
So this is the second time this happens to me. I've submitted a pull request ( https://github.com/apache/commons-numbers/pull/63 ), and the Coveralls reports says that several existing lines have been uncovered, which is a lie, because the lines purportedly "uncovered" were already not covered in

Re: [CSV] Release again

2019-07-03 Thread Hoa Phan
+1 Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android On Wed, Jul 3, 2019 at 18:13, Alex Herbert wrote: > On 15 Jun 2019, at 19:59, Alex Herbert wrote: > > > >> On 15 Jun 2019, at 18:57, Gary Gregory wrote: >> >> We've fixed some issues immediately after 1.7. How does everyone feel about >> releasing

Re: [CSV] Release again

2019-07-03 Thread Alex Herbert
> On 15 Jun 2019, at 19:59, Alex Herbert wrote: > > > >> On 15 Jun 2019, at 18:57, Gary Gregory wrote: >> >> We've fixed some issues immediately after 1.7. How does everyone feel about >> releasing again? >> What else needs to be addressed in the short term? >> Gary > > - Bug (picked up b