REQUEST: New integration for kubernetes-sigs/external-dns

[ivankatliarchuk]

Organization or Repo

kubernetes-sigs/external-dns

Name of integration

coveralls

Link to integration website

https://coveralls.io

Describe what is attempting to be accomplished

We would like to know which parts of our code aren’t covered by your test suite.

Steps to enable manually https://docs.coveralls.io/app-notifications

Projects that do use same coverall in kubernetes-sigs https://github.com/search?q=org%3Akubernetes-sigs%20coveralls&type=code. So this framework is widely used

kubernetes-sigs/karpenter coveralls enabled example kubernetes-sigs/karpenter#2091 (comment)

Additional context for request

No response

[BenTheElder]

Did you know that sigs.k8s.io/prow can render go coverage reports?
Take a look at one of the results from https://prow.k8s.io/?job=pull-kind-test

One concern with this is: whose coveralls account? how are we managing that?

[ivankatliarchuk]

For example all k8s-sigs project that push statistics https://coveralls.io/github/kubernetes-sigs/

kuberntes projects https://coveralls.io/github/kubernetes/

kubernetes-sigs/security-profiles-operator kubernetes-sigs/security-profiles-operator#2784 (comment)

[ivankatliarchuk]

One concern with this is: whose coveralls account? how are we managing that?

I'm not able to answer, most of the kubernetes-sigs projects are one the coveral platform for long time, who owns accounts I have no idea, and I have no found documentation. Do we need an approval to enable this app, is there list of approved apps?

This is not about accessing coverage reports, Is about a pull reques workflow improvement

1. Someone opens a pull request
2. Coverall reports sent to platform (this is already happening)
3. Coverall App post a comment so it's visible to me(reviewer) and contributor with statistics

The important part is visibilty, as not everyone aware and this could help us to push code quality a bit

[BenTheElder]

I'm not able to answer, most of the kubernetes-sigs projects are one the coveral platform for long time, who owns accounts I have no idea, my understanding, we are the consumers

I wouldn't agree with this statement.

For example all k8s-sigs project that push statistics https://coveralls.io/github/kubernetes-sigs/

This is about 10-20 projects, kubernetes-sigs has 187 repos.

The important part is visibilty, as not everyone aware and this could help us to push code quality a bit

ACK, that said, we generally have a policy that project should run on community owned accounts so we're not left hanging when people move on.

There was plenty of legacy infra missing this, but there was a huge effort to fix most of that.

[ivankatliarchuk]

I probably missing something here.

Most likely not agree with Who owns accounts I have no idea, my understanding, we are the consumers. We here is myself

As a k8s-sigs member, my role is limited to working with the resources provided by the communit, hence I'm in a position of a consumer. I don't have ownership of any accounts or infrastructure. Specifically, I have no access to Coveralls. Therefore, I can't determine who owns it – whether it's a specific member or the community – as I'm only working with what was made available upon joining the reviewers team.

Given the security concerns, and since installing the Coveralls app could not be an option, I'd like to understand what alternative functionality the community provides to compensate for the required features.

Is there is a list of wetted apps that we could request installation.

This is about 10-20 projects, kubernetes-sigs has 187 repos.

What the adoption level/percentage should be, so that the app could be considered by the community?

[BenTheElder]

I'm not saying we cannot use it, but I'd prefer we not add new usage that depends on mysterious accounts, and that potentially we have alternatives (which seem to be not what you're looking for).

Note: I am not an administrator of the github orgs.

I have no access to Coveralls. Therefore, I can't determine who owns it – whether it's a specific member or the community – as I'm only working with what was made available upon joining the reviewers team.

This sort of thing is exactly the problem with continuing to extend usage, versus at least stopping and sorting out an account stored in community 1password or something (all the sig leads should have access to one, otherwise ping #sig-contribex about this).