hi Antoine, I also prefer codecov.io, but unfortunately Apache Infra does not support it I believe due to some app hook permissions issue (there are some similar problems preventing CircleCI from being made available to Apache projects). I have asked before, you are welcome to open an INFRA ticket to ask again. I spent quite a bit of time fiddling with coveralls and couldn't get it working; I was hoping someone else would pick it up in the meantime.
I suggest we consider creating nightly coverage reports on codecov.io as part of our task automation work already under way (where does this work stand? should we sync on the separate e-mail thread about this) -- if we enable jobs to be run outside of the apache/ GitHub organization then we can control the available applications, like codecov - Wes On Thu, May 10, 2018 at 7:58 AM, Antoine Pitrou <anto...@python.org> wrote: > > Hi, > > Previous efforts to gather and publish C++ code coverage using the free > service provided by coveralls.io have stalled (see ARROW-27). > > I went ahead and experimented with another free service, codecov.io. I > got it to work with our C++ and Rust code bases. An example report can > be seen here: > https://codecov.io/gh/apache/arrow/list/8804ab50118f46139986acc435d740cb536f08f4/ > > The proposed changes are in PR #2023. > > The two platforms, codecov.io and coveralls.io, seem largely similar: > they provide free hosting for code coverage reports, support a range of > programming languages and code coverage formats, and display compute > coverage changes accross repository commits. I find codecov.io slightly > more readable but that's just a personal opinion. > > Do people or the Apache project have a strong preference for one of > those two services? > > Regards > > Antoine.
