[Cobertura-devel] Congratulations on a great project... and some questions/suggestions.

[Nathan J. <nr...@gm...>]

Hi,

Previously we were using jcoverage but have just switched to cobertura
due to the ongoing development that is occurring.  Thanks to those
involved for making this fork of jcoverage.

Would it be possible to change the class list in the bottom left frame
to be sorted by name rather than the whole classname & package similar
to javadoc.  It looks a little strange with the entire class list
being grouped and sorted by package but the package name not being
displayed.

We were also keen to see some reporting on inner classes.  I have
noted that a patch has been made to address this and I will try it out
shortly.  (Having spent most of this morning making our own
modifications to support inner classes in the html report, it will be
interesting to see this patch and how it is implemented.)

Another thing that the my fellow developers were disappointed with was
the loss of line counts from the html report as compared to the
jcoverage report.  Were they removed for specific reasons and are
there any plans to put them back?  Given the wide variation of line
counts in our source and packages it give a better perspective of
coverage when shown a percent and what number of lines that percentage
is over.

I also noted while looking at the code that method statistics are
collected as well (hope I am correct in this).  Perhaps as an
enhancment to the class overview pages which include the source, an
additional section could be put at the top breaking the source file
down by method.

I would also like to see the ant tasks improved to allow the location
of the 'cobertura.ser' file to be specified.  Currently we have to
move this file manually in our ant script between the instrument, unit
testing and reporting parts as they all look for the file in different
locations. This is probably due to the complexity of our build not
cobertura but having this flexibility would be good.

Can I also ask why cobertura ant tasks delegate to another JVM to run
cobertura?  While this may be a hangover from jcoverage, to me it
would make more sense to have the ant task just delegate to the
cobertura classes directly.  The main methods on the cobertura entry
points could be retained for those who wish to run it directly from
the command line.

Thanks for all the good work that is being put into cobertura.  

Nathan Johns.