Talk:Java code coverage tools

This article was nominated for deletion on 26 February 2013. The result of the discussion was keep.

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Software: Computing Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Software, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of software on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SoftwareWikipedia:WikiProject SoftwareTemplate:WikiProject Softwaresoftware Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Computing.

• more mature, and popular than cobertura, or clover for Eclipse (software):
  • http://marketplace.eclipse.org/node/264#.USyI28W_Ppt
  • http://marketplace.eclipse.org/content/ecobertura#.USyI2MW_Pps
  • http://marketplace.eclipse.org/content/atlassian-clover-eclipse#.USyJwsW_Pps
• replaced emma in eclipse EclEmma plugin
• replaced cobertura as default coverage tool for sonar
• 700+ installs / month for jenkins, strong growth: https://wiki.jenkins-ci.org/display/JENKINS/JaCoCo+Plugin

--ThurnerRupert (talk) 10:30, 26 February 2013 (UTC)Reply

None of those reasons count towards WP:NSOFT. I've nominated the article for deletion via AfD. Jarkeld (talk) 18:31, 26 February 2013 (UTC)Reply

you want to nominate the other tools as well, like emma, clover, and cobertura? or you are happy with the notability? --ThurnerRupert (talk) 21:26, 1 March 2013 (UTC)Reply

Haven't looked at them yet, perhaps in the near future. Jarkeld (talk) 23:29, 1 March 2013 (UTC)Reply

it stands out of the crowd in two aspects. only bytecode one (amongst cobertura, emma) supporting java 7 and up. only one supporting online instrumentation and collection and merge of the results (amongst cobertura, emma, clover). rechecked, it is in the three major java application development environments, Eclipse, Idea, Netbeans. --ThurnerRupert (talk) 02:23, 2 March 2013 (UTC)Reply

As per recommendation on WP:NSOFT - simple search of "EclEmma" on Google books will give a lot of books, which mention EclEmma and thus JaCoCo. Such well known books as "Java Power Tools" doesn't count as well? Mandrikov (talk) 01:41, 2 March 2013 (UTC)Reply

None of the sources mentioned in the article are significant coverage in reliable third party sources. EclEmma + JaCoCo yields 1 link on google books and it is a trivial mention. I'd like to invite you to actually participate in the AfD discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/JaCoCo. Jarkeld (talk) 01:15, 3 March 2013 (UTC)Reply

hmm ... i understand where you are coming from, you do not like the references in the online user manuals. and right so, as WP:NSOFT speaks about "printed manuals". which is a little unfortunate (and archaic), as there are no printed manuals for IntelliJ, Eclipse, Netbeans, Sonar any more. and it leaves out that the usage of a tool is simple and there is not a lot of references. Afd main page suggests to consider alternatives. Merging jacoco, clover, cobertura, emma into "java code coverage tools" seems to be the most appealing alternative to me currently. what you think? --ThurnerRupert (talk) 12:16, 3 March 2013 (UTC)Reply

The cobertura project is alive and being maintained, see http://cobertura.github.io/cobertura/

This article "grabs" the name but does not mention the software.

Just because someone thinks Jacoco is "superior" to Cobertura, the latter should not be "extinct" from Wikipedia completely. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.127.226.200 (talk) 13:44, 14 January 2014 (UTC)Reply

This is a proprietary software--and is listed as such in the article.

Shouldn't it have its own page rather than being listed with open-source brands? Hcsnoke (talk) 16:40, 13 April 2023 (UTC)Reply