You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
The project I'm working on (Kalium) has multiple multi-platform modules.
So, the following file structure is quite common:
# Class Y has 3 sources
- moduleA/src/commonMain/kotlin/packageX/ClassY.kt
- moduleA/src/androidMain/kotlin/packageX/ClassY.kt
- moduleA/src/jvmMain/kotlin/packageX/ClassY.kt
The XML reports (both IntelliJ or Jacoco) only contain the package and file name.
So the reports say something along these lines: <class name="packageX/ClassY" sourcefilename=ClassY.kt>.
There is no information about moduleA or commonMain/androidMain. Codecov can't make the relation between the report and Git's source files.
Ideally the "class name" and packages in the report should have the name of the module and source set, so Codecov can understand it.
Hi,
thank you for the offer.
At the moment, we have not studied a specific problem when integrating with codecov (we will definitely study your proposal). The main problem is that we cannot change the contents of the XML report, because it corresponds to the JaCoCo format (in which name is the name of the class, and class names do not contain directory names).
If it is not possible to get around this problem by configuring codecov, we can add a new XML format, special for codecov, which differs in content from the JaCoCo format (this solution will only work for the IntelliJ engine).
The project I'm working on (Kalium) has multiple multi-platform modules.
So, the following file structure is quite common:
The XML reports (both IntelliJ or Jacoco) only contain the package and file name.
So the reports say something along these lines:
<class name="packageX/ClassY" sourcefilename=ClassY.kt>
.There is no information about
moduleA
orcommonMain
/androidMain
. Codecov can't make the relation between the report and Git's source files.Ideally the "class name" and packages in the report should have the name of the module and source set, so Codecov can understand it.
Something like:
Am I missing a configuration, is there some setup missing on our end?
I am inclined to think this is what the ticket #16 is trying to say, maybe it just misses some details there.
I am willing to try contributing and implementing something like this.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: