{"action":"created","issue":{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/mbj/mutant/issues/559","repository_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/mbj/mutant","labels_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/mbj/mutant/issues/559/labels{/name}","comments_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/mbj/mutant/issues/559/comments","events_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/mbj/mutant/issues/559/events","html_url":"https://github.com/mbj/mutant/issues/559","id":145050271,"number":559,"title":"Expected coverage, perfect the enemy of good? (discuss)","user":{"login":"wied03","id":297123,"avatar_url":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/297123?v=3","gravatar_id":"","url":"https://api.github.com/users/wied03","html_url":"https://github.com/wied03","followers_url":"https://api.github.com/users/wied03/followers","following_url":"https://api.github.com/users/wied03/following{/other_user}","gists_url":"https://api.github.com/users/wied03/gists{/gist_id}","starred_url":"https://api.github.com/users/wied03/starred{/owner}{/repo}","subscriptions_url":"https://api.github.com/users/wied03/subscriptions","organizations_url":"https://api.github.com/users/wied03/orgs","repos_url":"https://api.github.com/users/wied03/repos","events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/wied03/events{/privacy}","received_events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/wied03/received_events","type":"User","site_admin":false},"labels":[{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/mbj/mutant/labels/question","name":"question","color":"cc317c"}],"state":"closed","locked":false,"assignee":null,"milestone":null,"comments":4,"created_at":"2016-04-01T00:08:10Z","updated_at":"2016-04-01T00:43:35Z","closed_at":"2016-04-01T00:37:16Z","body":"I was perplexed by an exit code of 1 when I was exceeding my expected coverage. I read this post and understand why that's happening: http://blog.arkency.com/2015/05/mutation-testing-and-continuous-integration/\r\n\r\nI can appreciate the logic in it. That said, doesn't requiring an exact match kind of make perfect the enemy of good for someone trying to get into this?\r\n\r\nIt seems like to \"white list\", I'd need to `--ignore-subject` if the subject doesn't match 100% or I need to text parse the output and implement >= on my own. If none of my subjects hit 100%, I'd have to exclude them all (or run them individually and face noise if the number slightly varies). I would have no incremental way to work towards 100%. \r\n\r\nIf I had the option to do greater than or equals (in addition to what's there), would that be a bad thing?\r\n\r\nIf the answer is no, then perhaps another way to fix this problem is to allow >=, but always remember the latest \"high point\". The coverage could be persisted to a file for each subject. Then mutant would fail if the number drops. I know that could be a bit awkward for CI/source control, but it's likely that someone runs the mutant tests locally anyways before CI does and they could see that the numbers \"increased\" in that persisted file and check it in to source control.\r\n\r\nAnyways, just some thoughts."},"comment":{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/mbj/mutant/issues/comments/204193070","html_url":"https://github.com/mbj/mutant/issues/559#issuecomment-204193070","issue_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/mbj/mutant/issues/559","id":204193070,"user":{"login":"mbj","id":117966,"avatar_url":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/117966?v=3","gravatar_id":"","url":"https://api.github.com/users/mbj","html_url":"https://github.com/mbj","followers_url":"https://api.github.com/users/mbj/followers","following_url":"https://api.github.com/users/mbj/following{/other_user}","gists_url":"https://api.github.com/users/mbj/gists{/gist_id}","starred_url":"https://api.github.com/users/mbj/starred{/owner}{/repo}","subscriptions_url":"https://api.github.com/users/mbj/subscriptions","organizations_url":"https://api.github.com/users/mbj/orgs","repos_url":"https://api.github.com/users/mbj/repos","events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/mbj/events{/privacy}","received_events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/mbj/received_events","type":"User","site_admin":false},"created_at":"2016-04-01T00:43:34Z","updated_at":"2016-04-01T00:43:34Z","body":"> Are pull requests for any of the above out of the question? Or is the review + long term maintenance of a PR for this going to be a pain?\r\n\r\nWhen a PR is made that passes code review and its not significantly to much (from my perspective dead) logic: I'll take it.\r\n\r\nCode review process here is \"though\" but should be of value for anyone trying."}}