Incomplete file path in XML report

[nedbat]

Originally reported by Anonymous

---

Hi there, we are relying on the XML coverage report generated in coverage.xml for our analysis.

In previous versions of coverage, when we run the command such as:

$ py.test --cov directory_one --cov directory_two --cov-report xml tests

We would get a coverage.xml file with sources listed as:

<sources>
	<source>/path/to/directory_one</source>
	<source>/path/to/directory_two</source>
</sources>

And each file would be reported in a line such as this:

<class branch-rate="0" complexity="0" filename="directory_one/__init__.py" line-rate="1" name="__init__.py">

Now in coverage 4.4 the first level of the directory path is missing and we get only:

<class branch-rate="0" complexity="0" filename="__init__.py" line-rate="1" name="__init__.py">

Is there any way to get the previous behaviour?

---

• Bitbucket: https://bitbucket.org/ned/coveragepy/issue/578

[nedbat]

This was a bug that was fixed. The filename attribute should be combinable with a source entry to find the file. Can you tell me more about why you need the directory name in both places?

[nedbat]

Original comment by Michal Karzynski (Bitbucket: postrational, GitHub: postrational)

---

If we have 2 files like this:

• /path/to/directory_one/__init__.py
• /path/to/directory_two/__init__.py

Then they would both get a like like this:

<class branch-rate="0" complexity="0" filename="__init__.py" line-rate="1" name="__init__.py">

How can I tell which file this refers to?

[nedbat]

Original comment by David Multer (Bitbucket: dmulter, GitHub: dmulter)

---

I'm seeing the same thing. Not only is the source file reference ambiguous, it has also broken my use of coverage2clover in my Bamboo builds as it can't find the source file.

[nedbat]

Yes, I see the problem, sorry. What is the correct behavior here? This was to fix https://bitbucket.org/ned/coveragepy/issues/526/generated-xml-invalid-paths-for-cobertura. How are the source paths and the filenames supposed to be combined?

[nedbat]

Original comment by David Multer (Bitbucket: dmulter, GitHub: dmulter)

---

No idea on how source paths is used, but the coverage2clover tool seems to just do an open() on the filename= value, so it must go back to the way it was previously for it to work again. Note that my coverage run produces multiple source paths as I use a shared repo for common code.

#!xml
	<sources>
		<source>/Users/xxx/Documents/xxx/app-common/apis</source>
		<source>/Users/xxx/Documents/xxx/app-foo</source>
		<source>/Users/xxx/Documents/xxx/app-foo/apis</source>
	</sources>

and

#!xml

	<class branch-rate="0" complexity="0" filename="apis/__init__.py" line-rate="1" name="__init__.py">

[nedbat]

@dmulter @postrational Can you provide me with a reproducible example, even if it's a link to an online repo with instructions of how to run the tests? I want to get this to work again for you. It's clear to me that combining the source path and the filename should be a real file path, so I think the fix was the correct one, but clearly I am not done since your use cases are broken.

[nedbat]

Original comment by Benjamin Morgan (Bitbucket: bj_morgan, GitHub: Unknown)

---

This change from 4.3.4 → 4.4 has also broken compatibility with the codeclimate test reporter. See codeclimate/python-test-reporter#40

[nedbat]

I want to make tools work, but I want all of them to work. I'm not going to simply revert the change. I'll make an improvement that will help everyone. It would be a big help to me if someone could provide a reproducible case of a multi-source result. Even better would be to advocate with them to make use of all of the information in the coverage.xml file.

[nedbat]

Original comment by David Multer (Bitbucket: dmulter, GitHub: dmulter)

---

https://github.com/dmulter/coverage2clover_bug

[nedbat]

Original comment by David Multer (Bitbucket: dmulter, GitHub: dmulter)

---

I also created an issue for this in the coverage2clover repo - tumb1er/coverage2clover#10

[nedbat]

@dmulter thanks for that. I'm trying to understand the old behavior you want back. When I run your code under coverage==4.3.4, only two/__init__.py is in the XML output. one is missing completely. So the old code had some problems with this multiple-source scenario also. Is that true of your real code also?

[nedbat]

Original comment by David Multer (Bitbucket: dmulter, GitHub: dmulter)

---

No, I think that's a side effect of not having any actual code to test in my example. You could easily just add a do-nothing function in each to get file output for both. You'll see the same problem. I think I'll go add it to the repo now...

[nedbat]

Original comment by David Multer (Bitbucket: dmulter, GitHub: dmulter)

---

Please check the repo again for a second variation of this bug.

[nedbat]

Thanks, but it looks like .coveragerc_noinitfiles is missing.

[nedbat]

Also, the __init__.py files are still empty?