Coverage#

SonarCloud reads both reports; it does not measure anything itself.

Why quarkus-jacoco is not optional#

The JaCoCo Maven plugin on its own reported 0% for TaskResource, UserService, Task and User — the four most heavily tested classes in the project — while reporting correctly for everything else. Those four are exactly the classes Quarkus rewrites at build time: the two Panache entities, and the two classes that touch entity fields or static finders. They are loaded by QuarkusClassLoader, which the stock agent cannot instrument, so their execution never reached the .exec file at all. Backend line coverage read 41% when the real figure was 89%.

io.quarkus:quarkus-jacoco reports against the bytecode Quarkus actually runs. Removing it silently returns those four classes to zero — the build still passes, the report still generates, and the number just quietly drops. The Maven plugin is still present, but only for its agent (tests that do not boot Quarkus) and its check goal; its report execution was removed, because it would overwrite the correct report with the broken one.

Both write target/jacoco-quarkus.exec, which is why quarkus.jacoco.reuse-data-file=true is set: without it the extension wipes what the Maven agent recorded.

If a local run shows a number you cannot explain, check the age of target/jacoco-quarkus.exec. The agent appends, so a file that survives across runs without a clean accumulates — the old target/jacoco.exec had grown to 58 MB and still held classes deleted months earlier.

The end-to-end suite is deliberately not counted#

Nothing from the Playwright run reaches the coverage figure: the backend runs in a container with no agent attached, and the frontend is a minified production bundle. This is a choice, not an oversight. The e2e suite exists to prove the real stack works — real redirects, real cookies, real persistence — and folding it into coverage would inflate the number in exactly the way that hides missing unit tests. A line that only a browser test ever reaches is a line with no unit test, and the number should say so.

The thresholds#

Backend 95% line / 90% branch; frontend 95% on all four counters. Each sits just below what the suite actually achieves (98%/93% and 100%), so a genuinely defensive branch does not fail the build on the day it is written. Raise them when coverage rises; do not lower them to fit a change.