While running an analysis, SonarQube raises an issue every time a piece of code breaks a coding rule. The set of coding rules is defined through the quality profile associated with the project. Developers can also manually raise issues that cannot be detected by SonarQube (examples: the implementation of the method does not comply to the functional requirements, the javadoc of the method does not match its implementation, etc.).
Each issue has one of five severities:
Bug with a high probability to impact the behavior of the application in production: memory leak, unclosed JDBC connection, .... The code MUST be immediately fixed.
Either a bug with a low probability to impact the behavior of the application in production or an issue which represents a security flaw: empty catch block, SQL injection, ... The code MUST be immediately reviewed.
Quality flaw which can highly impact the developer productivity: uncovered piece of code, duplicated blocks, unused parameters, ...
Quality flaw which can slightly impact the developer productivity: lines should not be too long, "switch" statements should have at least 3 cases, ...
Neither a bug nor a quality flaw, just a finding.
Ideally, the team wouldn't introduce any new issues (any new technical debt). Plugins like Issues Report or SonarQube in Eclipse or SonarQube in IntelliJ can help developers because they provide the ability to perform local analyses to check their code before pushing it back to the SCM. But in real life, it's not always possible to code without any new technical debt, and sometimes it's not worth it.
So new issues get introduced. SonarQube's issues workflow can help you manage those issues. By default, there are seven different things you can do to an issue (other than fixing it in the code!): Comment, Assign, Plan, Confirm, Change Severity, Resolve, and False Positive. Plugins may add more options, such as Link to JIRA.
These actions break out into four different categories. First up is the "technical review" category.
Confirm, False Positive, and Change Severity fall into this category, which presumes an initial review of an issue to verify its validity. Assume it's time to review the technical debt added in the last review period - whether that's a day, a week, or an entire sprint. You go through each new issue and do one of three things:
- Confirm - By confirming an issue, you're basically saying "Yep, that's a problem."
- False Positive - Looking at the issue in context, you realize that for whatever reason, this issue isn't actually an issue, erm... "problem." It's not actually a problem. So you mark it False Positive and move on. It will disappear immediately from drilldown and after the next analysis for issues counts.
- Change Severity - This is the middle ground between the first two options. Yes, it's a problem, but it's not as bad a problem as the rule's default severity makes it out to be. Or perhaps it's actually far worse. Either way, you adjust the severity of the issue to bring it in line with what you feel it deserves. The marker in the drilldown will change to show the new severity immediately, but the change won't be reflected in your issue counts until after the next analysis.
Once issues have been through technical review, it's time to decide how you're going to deal them. You've got up to three choices here, and while the technical review options are mutually exclusive (well, mostly), you may find yourself using all three of these on the same issue:
- Assign - Assign the issue to yourself or a teammate for immediate handling. The assignee will receive email notification of the assignment if he signed up for notifications, and the assignment will show up everywhere the issue is displayed, as well as in certain widgets.
- Plan - Some issues will need immediate action, but others you might want to put off. The Action Plan functionality lets you group issues into sets, optionally assign dates, and track set resolution. Once you've created an action plan, the Plan option on an issue lets you put the issue into the set.
- Link to JIRA - Assuming you've installed the JIRA Plugin, this option allows you to create a JIRA ticket for an issue. The URL to the JIRA ticket will be added to the issue and a link to the issue will be added to the JIRA ticket. After that though, there's no relationship between the two. Updating the JIRA ticket won't touch the issue and vice versa.
There's only one option under the General category: comment. At any time during the lifecycle of an issue, you can log a comment on it. Comments are displayed in the issue detail in a running log. You have the ability to edit or delete the comments you made.
If you've been doing the math, you already know that there's only one option left: Resolve. Use this option to signal that you think you've fixed an open issue. If you're right, the next analysis will move it to closed status. If you're wrong, its status will go to re-opened.
So that's it. That's how SonarQube lets you manage issues: by helping you vet them, organize what to fix now and what to schedule for later, and track them as your Plan comes together.
- For more detail on these topics, please see Reviewing Issues.
- To learn how you can affect multiple issues at once, see Bulk Changes on Issues
- Issues come from rules and rules are collected in profiles. Only certain users can edit profiles, but every user can view them. To learn more about what's in a profile, see Quality Profiles.
- For SonarQube versions prior to 3.6, see Violations and Reviews.