Hi, I'd like to start a discussion about turning on CodeCov report for PRs to master to show the PR's impact on unit test coverage. Previous discussion on https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/17382.
Proposal: 1. Unit test coverage will be added to the CI pipeline and reported to the PR page. Sample report: @@ Coverage Diff @@## master #17382 +/- ## ========================================= Coverage ? 32.10% Complexity ? 4141 ========================================= Files ? 387 Lines ? 42806 Branches ? 4420 ========================================= Hits ? 13741 Misses ? 27032 Partials ? 2033 2. The report will serve as additional input for the reviewers. The requester is expected to explain any significant negative impact. Why? 1. The existing code coverage for Pulsar is very poor at just above 50%. Reasonable expectation for libraries is 90% and 70 or 80% for the broker. We are at 60% and 50%. 2. The coverage report would prevent coverage from getting worse and bring the conversation on the table. 3. Even though code coverage has its limitation in assessing test coverage, it's the only viable tool. Thoughts?
