title: integration tests vs test coverage
body: <p>My company has a rule to reach 75% test coverage, either by unit or by integration tests. due to the complexity of the overall system, developers tend to write integration tests (e.g. using selenium webdriver against the running application) instead of taking the burden of mocking away dependent services/classes.</p>
  
  <p>I am not a friend of that and wonder what the test-coverage data for i-tests actually means:</p>
  
  <p>In my opinion, a test should define expected behavior and test that. If an i-test goes deep into the application, through many services, possibly down to the DB-layer and back again, it will cover a lot of lines, but it is absolutely not clear what the expected behavior of such a covered line is. Thus the quality of the coverage data is questionable IMHO and -- even worse -- increases maintenance efforts.</p>
  
  <p>Is that POV correct? How can I back it up when it comes to discussion with management ?</p>