Use full precision when comparing coverage to thresholds #71
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This eliminates rounding when comparing against the configured coverage thresholds. 99.6% coverage should not pass the build if someone has required 100% coverage.
|
Thank you for this pull request! Please check this document for how the Jenkins project handles pull requests. |
centic9
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 25, 2016
Use full precision when comparing coverage to thresholds
|
Thanks for the PR! |
|
Any idea when a new version will be released? |
|
Originally I plan to wait for PR #66 to be reviewed to include it as well in the next release... |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This eliminates rounding when comparing against the configured coverage thresholds.
99.6% coverage should not pass the build if someone has required 100% coverage.
There's some argument that round() should be replaced with floor() for presentation purposes as well, but this seems like a less controversial starting point.