Restrict coverage to raise or stay

I would like to get my builds failed if the coverage fails and thus enforce a raising coverage.

This is a really important thing for the coala community (coala-analyzer.org) as well as at least one commercial client of mine who's thinking about switching to gitlab.

Added ~19173 label

Added feature proposal label

@sils Interesting idea! /cc @markpundsack

The problem is that we can't patch this in from the outside because we need the master coverage. It's really important for us.

I.e. not realizable with usual GitLab CI unless we do crazy stuff like "deploying" master coverage somewhere

Requested by customer: https://na34.salesforce.com/0016100000azvOt

Any news? This should be super easy to do.

Mentioned in merge request !7285 (closed)

Added ~113220 label

I think, this is valuable for GitLab development, too. cc @rymai

I think we would need https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/issues/20428 first, because this will make it necessary to create more useful approac h to storing coverage values.

One thing that we should think about, is how to design this feature to work well when someone decides to parallelize her test suite heavily, but this is (partially) answered by our code coverage badge implementation. Implementation here may need some .gitlab-ci.yml specific settings, though.

Mentioned in merge request !7447 (merged)

@grzesiek it seems like https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/issues/20428 has been implemented in https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/merge_requests/7447 now, so that blocker is gone.

@underyx Yes. I think that, generally speaking, we might just want to start with comparing a compound coverage on merge request to coverage on a target branch (calculated in latest successful pipeline). This should be quite easy. @markpundsack does it make sense to implement it that way and open this for Community Contribution?

Actually, I wonder… wouldn't this also be blocked by https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/issues/23902? You can't fail a pipeline if you don't have know which merge request it's for, and therefore don't know the target branch, right?

@underyx Practically speaking, comparing to default branch is likely to cover 99% of usage, so I wouldn't block on #23902 (moved).

added ~123454 label

And isn't it a problem if pipelines are failed because master's coverage increases after the branch-off point and the source branch is not rebased yet?

An alternative route is adding https://codecov.io as an integration. https://github.com/codecov/support/issues/370

Though codecov.io costs six times as much as gitlab EE.

problem if pipelines are failed because master's coverage increases

@underyx I tend to agree. So rather than comparing to the current coverage of the default / target branch we would need to compare to the common ancestor commit (or the branch-off point).

moved to gitlab#5993

Hey!

GitLab is moving all development for both GitLab Community Edition and Enterprise Edition into a single codebase. The current gitlab-ce repository will become a read-only mirror, without any proprietary code. All development is moved to the current gitlab-ee repository, which we will rename to just gitlab in the coming weeks. As part of this migration, issues will be moved to the current gitlab-ee project.

If you have any questions about all of this, please ask them in our dedicated FAQ issue.

https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ee/issues/13855

You can also find more information here:

• https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ee/issues/13304
• https://about.gitlab.com/2019/08/23/a-single-codebase-for-gitlab-community-and-enterprise-edition/

Frequently Asked Questions

For an up to date list of questions and answers, please take a look at https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ee/issues/13855

What will we do with the repository names?

https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ee/ will become https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab, and https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce will become https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-foss.

Why rename gitlab-ce to gitlab-foss?

Using "gitlab" and "gitlab-ce" would be confusing, so we decided to rename gitlab-ce to gitlab-foss to make the purpose of this FOSS repository more clear

I created a merge requests for CE, and this got closed. What do I need to do?

You will need to create a merge request at https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ee/. This link will eventually redirect to https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab.

How does the licensing work in this new setup?

Everything in the ee/ directory is proprietary. Everything else is free and open source software. If your merge request does not change anything in the ee/ directory, the process of contributing changes is the same as when using the gitlab-ce repository.

Will you accept merge requests on the gitlab-ce/gitlab-foss project after it has been renamed?

No. Merge requests submitted to this project will be closed automatically.

Will I still be able to view old issues and merge requests in gitlab-ce/gitlab-foss?

Yes.

How will this affect users of GitLab CE using Omnibus?

No changes will be necessary, as the packages built remain the same.

How will this affect users of GitLab CE that build from source?

Once the project has been renamed, you will need to change your Git remotes to use this new URL. GitLab will take care of redirecting Git operations so there is no hard deadline, but we recommend doing this as soon as the projects have been renamed.

Where can I see a timeline of the remaining steps?

https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ee/issues/13304

Will community contributions submitted to the new "gitlab" repository be available in the new gitlab-foss repository?

Yes, these changes will be synced to gitlab-foss automatically, several times per day.

locked this issue