Coveralls and coverage plugin test different things

[offtherailz]

Is impossible to test locally the coverage as coveralls does because the local tool is not aligned with the coveralls rules.
We should find a solutions to speed up the development and don't force developers to try to guess what Coveralls wants.

[mircobe87]

In Coveralls report, lines seem to be shifted.
The karma-coverage html report seems to show the right lines coverage.

The local reporter lcovonly which is used by karma-coverage seems to report the same coveralls results.
For Atom editor we can use the lcov-info plugin to show lcovonly report.

[offtherailz]

We noticed 2 lines shift:
Can this be useful ?
https://www.npmjs.com/package/karma-remap-coverage

[offtherailz]

Also this may help
codymikol/karma-webpack#21 (comment)

[offtherailz]

Did some experiment, but did not get the solution.
Tried all the libs named with a permutation of [babel, loader, webpack, coverage] but with the same result.
The problem is that the coverage info are applied on the transpiled code by babel-loader in webpack.

Someone uses isparta, that is not a mantained project. I don't thing is a good solution.
Someone else use istanbul.1.0.0-aplha.1. We could try it, but it is an alpha.