You can subscribe to this list here.
2005 |
Jan
|
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
|
Jul
(17) |
Aug
(6) |
Sep
(13) |
Oct
|
Nov
(2) |
Dec
|
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
2006 |
Jan
|
Feb
(99) |
Mar
(42) |
Apr
(8) |
May
(17) |
Jun
(1) |
Jul
(1) |
Aug
(6) |
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
(26) |
Dec
|
2007 |
Jan
(1) |
Feb
(1) |
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
(21) |
Jun
|
Jul
(2) |
Aug
(21) |
Sep
(20) |
Oct
(33) |
Nov
(26) |
Dec
|
2008 |
Jan
(45) |
Feb
(8) |
Mar
|
Apr
(2) |
May
|
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
(1) |
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
(1) |
2009 |
Jan
|
Feb
(4) |
Mar
(1) |
Apr
(1) |
May
|
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
(9) |
Nov
(1) |
Dec
|
From: Wolfe, P. <WolfeP@FCSAmerica.com> - 2009-11-11 16:52:44
|
Hi all, Please check out the NMock3 project at http://nmock3.codeplex.com/. Please request to join the project in order for some of you to check out the Subversion integration. As a tool for .NET developers, I think NMock3 might get more traction at this location. I would like to know your thoughts of moving the NMock community to this location. Thanks much, Philip ********************************************************************** This communication may contain privileged information intended solely for the recipient. It may not be used or disclosed except for the purpose for which it has been sent. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not copy, distribute or take any action in reliance on it. Unless expressly stated, opinions in this message are those of the individual sender and not of Farm Credit Services of America. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender and delete the message and any attached documents. |
From: Charlie P. <ch...@po...> - 2009-10-30 06:24:23
|
I tried out Codeplex with NUnitLite, first using VS integration and then tossing that and using a command line client. Finally, I moved it (and NUnit) to Launchpad, which is working out pretty well. I hear good things about Github too. IMO, DVCS is the way to go for community projects these days. Charlie > -----Original Message----- > From: Steve Freeman [mailto:st...@m3...] > Sent: Thursday, October 29, 2009 1:33 PM > To: NMock2 Development Discussion > Subject: Re: [NMock2-Dev] NMock2 to NMock3 > > > If I can get consensus, my proposal is to move the source and > > community (nmock.org, SF>Nmock, & SF>NMock2) to codeplex because of > > its TFS integration. > > I'm not clear. Does this imply that users of codeplex must > have TFS clients, or that they can use it and other clients > if they want to? > > S. > > -------------------------------------------------------------- > ---------------- > Come build with us! The BlackBerry(R) Developer Conference in > SF, CA is the only developer event you need to attend this > year. Jumpstart your developing skills, take BlackBerry > mobile applications to market and stay ahead of the curve. > Join us from November 9 - 12, 2009. Register now! > http://p.sf.net/sfu/devconference > _______________________________________________ > NMock-two-dev mailing list > NMo...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nmock-two-dev > |
From: Harold H. <Har...@ps...> - 2009-10-29 20:54:30
|
Here's the list of clients supported: http://codeplex.codeplex.com/wikipage?title=CodePlex%20FAQ&referringTitl e=CodePlex%20Help%20Wiki#Source -----Original Message----- From: Steve Freeman [mailto:st...@m3...] Sent: October-29-09 1:33 PM To: NMock2 Development Discussion Subject: Re: [NMock2-Dev] NMock2 to NMock3 > If I can get consensus, my proposal is to move the source and > community (nmock.org, SF>Nmock, & SF>NMock2) to codeplex because of > its TFS integration. I'm not clear. Does this imply that users of codeplex must have TFS clients, or that they can use it and other clients if they want to? S. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ------ Come build with us! The BlackBerry(R) Developer Conference in SF, CA is the only developer event you need to attend this year. Jumpstart your developing skills, take BlackBerry mobile applications to market and stay ahead of the curve. Join us from November 9 - 12, 2009. Register now! http://p.sf.net/sfu/devconference _______________________________________________ NMock-two-dev mailing list NMo...@li... https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nmock-two-dev |
From: Mike M. <mik...@gm...> - 2009-10-29 20:47:22
|
On Thu, Oct 29, 2009 at 2:33 PM, Steve Freeman <st...@m3...> wrote: > > If I can get consensus, my proposal is to move the source and > > community (nmock.org, SF>Nmock, & SF>NMock2) to codeplex because of > > its TFS integration. > > I'm not clear. Does this imply that users of codeplex must have TFS > clients, or that they can use it and other clients if they want to? > Yeah, I kinda expect most people on the nmock dev lists would consider TFS a limitation, rather than a feature! Basically though, Codeplex uses TFS for its source code management and bug tracking. TFS turned out to be such a turn off to the open-source community that Microsoft created a "bridge" that allows you to check out from TFS using a Subversion client. Since they did that there's no requirement for anyone to use TFS unless they want to and like the way it works. |
From: Steve F. <st...@m3...> - 2009-10-29 20:34:39
|
> If I can get consensus, my proposal is to move the source and > community (nmock.org, SF>Nmock, & SF>NMock2) to codeplex because of > its TFS integration. I'm not clear. Does this imply that users of codeplex must have TFS clients, or that they can use it and other clients if they want to? S. |
From: Wolfe, P. <WolfeP@FCSAmerica.com> - 2009-10-29 20:07:48
|
Hi all, Please check out the sources from this zip file. (I do not have a patch for the existing code because I am CVS stupid :)) The existing sources were left unchanged except for one small change in the Mockery class to make the private creation method, protected. All of the new code is in the NMock3 project. The code comments are half there. Check out its usage in the UnitTests project. http://www.philipwolfe.com/attachments/nmock3.zip If I can get consensus, my proposal is to move the source and community (nmock.org, SF>Nmock, & SF>NMock2) to codeplex because of its TFS integration. It will start out in a beta status to get more feedback and then to release. Related to Moq.me: Currently that framework can't track when an event is bound to a delegate. This was a deal breaker for us and our presenter tests in our MVP pattern. Not to mention, I LOVE the readability of NMock. Developers will be drawn to stuff they understand. Mocking is already hard enough. If you can make it read like English, you will get more unit tests! Philip From: Thomas Weingartner [mailto:tho...@gm...] Sent: Wednesday, October 28, 2009 6:10 PM To: NMock2 Development Discussion Cc: Wolfe, Philip Subject: Re: [NMock2-Dev] Fwd: NMock project Hi Everybody A lot of people were confused about the current NMock project on sf.net, because we updated a lot of stuff in NMock2, also hosted on sf.net. I would really appreciate the shutdown of NMock on sf.net. @Philip: I would like to discuss your ideas (lambda, NMock3 and hosting on codeplex) with the other team members of NMock2, particularly with those who did the most development work. Do you have a patch to the NMock2 source-code, so we could see, what you have done so far? I will let you know, if I have news. Cheers Thomas On 28.10.2009 16:41, Mike Mason wrote: Hey folks, Philip would like to run the NMock project off Codeplex infrastructure, and shut down (or re-point) existing Sourceforge and nmock.org<http://nmock.org> sites. I'm not active on development on NMock and am still using an RC version in my day job. Would anyone object to Philip launching a Codeplex Nmock project? Once it's looking good we can do the sf.net<http://sf.net> / nmock.org<http://nmock.org> re-point. Cheers, Mike. _______________________________________________ NMock-two-dev mailing list NMo...@li...<mailto:NMo...@li...> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nmock-two-dev ********************************************************************** This communication may contain privileged information intended solely for the recipient. It may not be used or disclosed except for the purpose for which it has been sent. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not copy, distribute or take any action in reliance on it. Unless expressly stated, opinions in this message are those of the individual sender and not of Farm Credit Services of America. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender and delete the message and any attached documents. |
From: Steve F. <st...@m3...> - 2009-10-29 01:01:22
|
I have the nmock.org domain name. If the committers can come to an agreement, we can sort something out. S. On 29 Oct 2009, at 00:09, Thomas Weingartner wrote: > Hi Everybody > > A lot of people were confused about the current NMock project on sf.net > , because we updated a lot of stuff in NMock2, also hosted on sf.net. > > I would really appreciate the shutdown of NMock on sf.net. > > @Philip: I would like to discuss your ideas (lambda, NMock3 and > hosting on codeplex) with the other team members of NMock2, > particularly with those who did the most development work. Do you > have a patch to the NMock2 source-code, so we could see, what you > have done so far? I will let you know, if I have news. |
From: Thomas W. <tho...@gm...> - 2009-10-28 23:36:34
|
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN"> <html> <head> <meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type"> </head> <body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000"> Hi Everybody<br> <br> A lot of people were confused about the current NMock project on sf.net, because we updated a lot of stuff in NMock2, also hosted on sf.net.<br> <br> I would really appreciate the shutdown of NMock on sf.net.<br> <br> @Philip: I would like to discuss your ideas (lambda, NMock3 and hosting on codeplex) with the other team members of NMock2, particularly with those who did the most development work. Do you have a patch to the NMock2 source-code, so we could see, what you have done so far? I will let you know, if I have news.<br> <br> Cheers<br> Thomas<br> <br> On 28.10.2009 16:41, Mike Mason wrote: <blockquote cite="mid:b0a...@ma..." type="cite">Hey folks,<br> <br> Philip would like to run the NMock project off Codeplex infrastructure, and shut down (or re-point) existing Sourceforge and <a moz-do-not-send="true" href="http://nmock.org">nmock.org</a> sites.<br> <br> I'm not active on development on NMock and am still using an RC version in my day job. Would anyone object to Philip launching a Codeplex Nmock project? Once it's looking good we can do the <a moz-do-not-send="true" href="http://sf.net">sf.net</a> / <a moz-do-not-send="true" href="http://nmock.org">nmock.org</a> re-point.<br> <br> Cheers,<br> Mike.<br> <br> <div class="gmail_quote">---------- Forwarded message ----------<br> From: <b class="gmail_sendername">Wolfe, Philip</b> <span dir="ltr"><<a moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:Wo...@fc...">Wo...@fc...</a>></span><br> Date: Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 12:04 PM<br> Subject: NMock project<br> To: "<a moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:mm...@th...">mm...@th...</a>" <<a moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:mm...@th...">mm...@th...</a>><br> <br> <br> <div link="blue" vlink="purple" lang="EN-US"> <div> <p class="MsoNormal">Hi Mike,</p> <p class="MsoNormal"> </p> <p class="MsoNormal">(I think we have emailed once in the past.)</p> <p class="MsoNormal"> </p> <p class="MsoNormal">I have made some major updates to the NMock project. I have taken the ideas from the <a moz-do-not-send="true" href="http://moq.me" target="_blank">http://moq.me</a> framework and applied them to NMock. Now all of the methods are overloaded with lambda expressions to make refactoring easier. The v2 codebase was left untouched and v3 is completely backward compatible. In fact, you can mix and match v2 and v3 syntax in the same tests. I would be happy to share an alpha version of the code.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"> </p> <p class="MsoNormal">I would like to start version 3 of NMock at codeplex. I would also like to get your thoughts of moving the community there as well. In my mind this would involve shutting down the sourceforge site and updates or removal of the <a moz-do-not-send="true" href="http://nmock.org" target="_blank">nmock.org</a> site. The goal is to have developers move to the new version and not get confused with previous versions that are no longer under development.</p> <p class="MsoNormal"> </p> <p class="MsoNormal">I look forward to hearing from you,</p> <p class="MsoNormal">Philip</p> </div> <hr>This communication may contain privileged information intended solely for the recipient. It may not be used or disclosed except for the purpose for which it has been sent. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not copy, distribute or take any action in reliance on it. Unless expressly stated, opinions in this message are those of the individual sender and not of Farm Credit Services of America. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender and delete the message and any attached documents.<br> </div> </div> <br> <pre wrap=""> <hr width="90%" size="4"> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Come build with us! The BlackBerry(R) Developer Conference in SF, CA is the only developer event you need to attend this year. Jumpstart your developing skills, take BlackBerry mobile applications to market and stay ahead of the curve. Join us from November 9 - 12, 2009. Register now! <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://p.sf.net/sfu/devconference">http://p.sf.net/sfu/devconference</a></pre> <pre wrap=""> <hr width="90%" size="4"> _______________________________________________ NMock-two-dev mailing list <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:NMo...@li...">NMo...@li...</a> <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nmock-two-dev">https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nmock-two-dev</a> </pre> </blockquote> <br> </body> </html> |
From: Mike C. <mik...@gm...> - 2009-10-28 22:24:02
|
Fine by me. I was thinking about using lambdas to specify NMock members just this afternoon, and would be happy to see this go in. That said, moq.me looks interesting from a very brief peek; I hadn't heard of it before. What are the benefits of porting ideas to NMock, as opposed to just using (and possibly extending) that? - Mike (no relation) 2009/10/28 Mike Mason <mm...@th...>: > Hey folks, > > Philip would like to run the NMock project off Codeplex infrastructure, and > shut down (or re-point) existing Sourceforge and nmock.org sites. > > I'm not active on development on NMock and am still using an RC version in > my day job. Would anyone object to Philip launching a Codeplex Nmock > project? Once it's looking good we can do the sf.net / nmock.org re-point. > > Cheers, > Mike. > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: Wolfe, Philip <Wo...@fc...> > Date: Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 12:04 PM > Subject: NMock project > To: "mm...@th..." <mm...@th...> > > > Hi Mike, > > > > (I think we have emailed once in the past.) > > > > I have made some major updates to the NMock project. I have taken the ideas > from the http://moq.me framework and applied them to NMock. Now all of the > methods are overloaded with lambda expressions to make refactoring easier. > The v2 codebase was left untouched and v3 is completely backward > compatible. In fact, you can mix and match v2 and v3 syntax in the same > tests. I would be happy to share an alpha version of the code. > > > > I would like to start version 3 of NMock at codeplex. I would also like to > get your thoughts of moving the community there as well. In my mind this > would involve shutting down the sourceforge site and updates or removal of > the nmock.org site. The goal is to have developers move to the new version > and not get confused with previous versions that are no longer under > development. > > > > I look forward to hearing from you, > > Philip > > ________________________________ > This communication may contain privileged information intended solely for > the recipient. It may not be used or disclosed except for the purpose for > which it has been sent. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not > copy, distribute or take any action in reliance on it. Unless expressly > stated, opinions in this message are those of the individual sender and not > of Farm Credit Services of America. If you have received this communication > in error, please notify the sender and delete the message and any attached > documents. > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Come build with us! The BlackBerry(R) Developer Conference in SF, CA > is the only developer event you need to attend this year. Jumpstart your > developing skills, take BlackBerry mobile applications to market and stay > ahead of the curve. Join us from November 9 - 12, 2009. Register now! > http://p.sf.net/sfu/devconference > _______________________________________________ > NMock-two-dev mailing list > NMo...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nmock-two-dev > > |
From: Mike M. <mm...@th...> - 2009-10-28 15:41:38
|
Hey folks, Philip would like to run the NMock project off Codeplex infrastructure, and shut down (or re-point) existing Sourceforge and nmock.org sites. I'm not active on development on NMock and am still using an RC version in my day job. Would anyone object to Philip launching a Codeplex Nmock project? Once it's looking good we can do the sf.net / nmock.org re-point. Cheers, Mike. ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Wolfe, Philip <Wo...@fc...> Date: Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 12:04 PM Subject: NMock project To: "mm...@th..." <mm...@th...> Hi Mike, (I think we have emailed once in the past.) I have made some major updates to the NMock project. I have taken the ideas from the http://moq.me framework and applied them to NMock. Now all of the methods are overloaded with lambda expressions to make refactoring easier. The v2 codebase was left untouched and v3 is completely backward compatible. In fact, you can mix and match v2 and v3 syntax in the same tests. I would be happy to share an alpha version of the code. I would like to start version 3 of NMock at codeplex. I would also like to get your thoughts of moving the community there as well. In my mind this would involve shutting down the sourceforge site and updates or removal of the nmock.org site. The goal is to have developers move to the new version and not get confused with previous versions that are no longer under development. I look forward to hearing from you, Philip ------------------------------ This communication may contain privileged information intended solely for the recipient. It may not be used or disclosed except for the purpose for which it has been sent. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not copy, distribute or take any action in reliance on it. Unless expressly stated, opinions in this message are those of the individual sender and not of Farm Credit Services of America. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender and delete the message and any attached documents. |
From: Nat P. <nat...@gm...> - 2009-04-02 21:14:24
|
I'd be happy to see you continue development of NMock-2. --Nat 2009/2/18 Thomas Weingartner <tho...@gm...>: > Hi Everybody who is listening to this mailing list: > > Almost a year ago you posted your last release on NMock project. On the > other side we mad a lot of progress thanks to two very active > developers. Today we could present the first release candidate of > mocking classes. > > So we have the code, you have the downloads (12000 against 1900 in > 2008): Wouldn't it make sense to consolidate and stop working on NMock > and stop confusing users? > > Please let me know if you are willing to close down NMock and > participate NMock2... > > I'm happy to hear from you. > Thomas > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Open Source Business Conference (OSBC), March 24-25, 2009, San Francisco, CA > -OSBC tackles the biggest issue in open source: Open Sourcing the Enterprise > -Strategies to boost innovation and cut costs with open source participation > -Receive a $600 discount off the registration fee with the source code: SFAD > http://p.sf.net/sfu/XcvMzF8H > _______________________________________________ > NMock-two-dev mailing list > NMo...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nmock-two-dev > -- http://www.natpryce.com |
From: Thomas W. <tho...@gm...> - 2009-03-04 18:31:45
|
No problem, Steve. I just wanna make sure that you know, your great work will continue to live... Cheers Thomas On 21.02.2009 20:44, Steve Mitcham wrote: > That's great. To be honest I've not looked at your stuff, so take my commentsd as general concerns as opposed to any specific criticism > > |
From: Steve M. <Ste...@ty...> - 2009-02-21 19:44:28
|
That's great. To be honest I've not looked at your stuff, so take my commentsd as general concerns as opposed to any specific criticism ----- Original Message ----- From: Thomas Weingartner <tho...@gm...> To: NMock2 Development Discussion <nmo...@li...> Sent: Sat Feb 21 02:51:58 2009 Subject: Re: [NMock2-Dev] Consolidation of NMock and NMock2 Hi Steve Thanks for your reply. I do not understand "...how far you've taken the syntax away from NMock2's style.". One of our goals was to have full backward compatibility to the original NMock2 project. To prove this, I opened an older project that we started 3 years ago with NMock2 version 1.0. The project compiled immediatly **without any** modification. 15 of the 242 tests failed because of the new mock generation and some missing return values. I think we did a great job in backward compatibility and we had a lot of discussions about it. I always fought for the full compatibility! And the current release candidate published on the sourceforge site provides the ability to mock classes too! You can compare your "old" syntax http://nmock.org/cheatsheet.html with the new one here: http://nmock2.sourceforge.net/doc/NMock2-Cheat-Sheet.pdf As I always said, our goal is to **continue your great work** and we are still confident about the simple NMock2 syntax. My concern is that users are confused when they browse to the nmock project site. Just forward them to the nmock2 project site. Cheers Thomas On 18.02.2009 22:51, Steve Mitcham wrote: > ... > My big concern is with how far you've taken the syntax away from NMock2's style. Granted, for .NET 3.5 there is a need to move away from the existing style, however, I wouldn't want users of the project to think that they are getting an upgrade to what they have, only to discover that it is actually quite different. So if you start consolidating, it would be nice to have a migration guide ready as well as your code drop. > ... > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Open Source Business Conference (OSBC), March 24-25, 2009, San Francisco, CA -OSBC tackles the biggest issue in open source: Open Sourcing the Enterprise -Strategies to boost innovation and cut costs with open source participation -Receive a $600 discount off the registration fee with the source code: SFAD http://p.sf.net/sfu/XcvMzF8H _______________________________________________ NMock-two-dev mailing list NMo...@li... https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nmock-two-dev |
From: Thomas W. <tho...@gm...> - 2009-02-21 08:52:18
|
Hi Steve Thanks for your reply. I do not understand "...how far you've taken the syntax away from NMock2's style.". One of our goals was to have full backward compatibility to the original NMock2 project. To prove this, I opened an older project that we started 3 years ago with NMock2 version 1.0. The project compiled immediatly **without any** modification. 15 of the 242 tests failed because of the new mock generation and some missing return values. I think we did a great job in backward compatibility and we had a lot of discussions about it. I always fought for the full compatibility! And the current release candidate published on the sourceforge site provides the ability to mock classes too! You can compare your "old" syntax http://nmock.org/cheatsheet.html with the new one here: http://nmock2.sourceforge.net/doc/NMock2-Cheat-Sheet.pdf As I always said, our goal is to **continue your great work** and we are still confident about the simple NMock2 syntax. My concern is that users are confused when they browse to the nmock project site. Just forward them to the nmock2 project site. Cheers Thomas On 18.02.2009 22:51, Steve Mitcham wrote: > ... > My big concern is with how far you've taken the syntax away from NMock2's style. Granted, for .NET 3.5 there is a need to move away from the existing style, however, I wouldn't want users of the project to think that they are getting an upgrade to what they have, only to discover that it is actually quite different. So if you start consolidating, it would be nice to have a migration guide ready as well as your code drop. > ... > |
From: Steve M. <Ste...@ty...> - 2009-02-18 23:40:11
|
I've been unable to actively work the project due to my work getting in the way and not allocating a lot of funds for the open source. I asked you at the time you posted where you were going with NMock so that we could try and coordinate the two efforts. My big concern is with how far you've taken the syntax away from NMock2's style. Granted, for .NET 3.5 there is a need to move away from the existing style, however, I wouldn't want users of the project to think that they are getting an upgrade to what they have, only to discover that it is actually quite different. So if you start consolidating, it would be nice to have a migration guide ready as well as your code drop. I'm going to continue to not be able to work this, so I'll defer to some of the older project owners on whether they have opinions on this. ________________________________________ From: Thomas Weingartner [tho...@gm...] Sent: Wednesday, February 18, 2009 2:52 PM To: NMock2 Development Discussion Subject: [NMock2-Dev] Consolidation of NMock and NMock2 Hi Everybody who is listening to this mailing list: Almost a year ago you posted your last release on NMock project. On the other side we mad a lot of progress thanks to two very active developers. Today we could present the first release candidate of mocking classes. So we have the code, you have the downloads (12000 against 1900 in 2008): Wouldn't it make sense to consolidate and stop working on NMock and stop confusing users? Please let me know if you are willing to close down NMock and participate NMock2... I'm happy to hear from you. Thomas ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Open Source Business Conference (OSBC), March 24-25, 2009, San Francisco, CA -OSBC tackles the biggest issue in open source: Open Sourcing the Enterprise -Strategies to boost innovation and cut costs with open source participation -Receive a $600 discount off the registration fee with the source code: SFAD http://p.sf.net/sfu/XcvMzF8H _______________________________________________ NMock-two-dev mailing list NMo...@li... https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nmock-two-dev |
From: Thomas W. <tho...@gm...> - 2009-02-18 20:52:33
|
Hi Everybody who is listening to this mailing list: Almost a year ago you posted your last release on NMock project. On the other side we mad a lot of progress thanks to two very active developers. Today we could present the first release candidate of mocking classes. So we have the code, you have the downloads (12000 against 1900 in 2008): Wouldn't it make sense to consolidate and stop working on NMock and stop confusing users? Please let me know if you are willing to close down NMock and participate NMock2... I'm happy to hear from you. Thomas |
From: Sandhya B. <sa...@lu...> - 2008-12-22 08:01:33
|
Hi, This is sandhya,i m interested to know the features added in nmock2 over nmock.could you please send me information regarding this. Thanks & Regards Sandhya.B |
From: Peter W. <pet...@pa...> - 2008-09-24 12:28:55
|
Back in January Steve made a post regarding the NMock2 fork at: http://sourceforge.net/projects/nmock2/ At the time it sounded like the two projects would be consolidated. Has there been any further progress on this? If you're not coming to SourceForge via www.nmock.org, it's confusing as heck trying to work out which of the two projects to use. Thanks, Peter. |
From: Richard H. <aci...@ac...> - 2008-04-21 16:07:20
|
Hi all, I have been trying to contact Gnoso/Ncover about getting a license for us to use in our build and for checking out the code coverage of our tests before we check in new code. So far I have been unsuccessfull in getting any response. If anyone on this list has better contacts, or a more visible presence in the open source community that might be able to get this for us or put me in contact with the correct people I would appreciate it. -Richard Holden |
From: Richard H. <aci...@ac...> - 2008-04-21 16:03:59
|
There is an enhancement request for more matchers for the generic list. The request linked to an email thread that I don¹t seem to be able to get to anymore so if anyone who has written custom list matchers or has changed their testing because they didn¹t have a list matcher let me know what is needed I will be able to work on getting them into the main release. -Richard Holden |
From: Mads B. D. <mb...@db...> - 2008-02-18 09:07:04
|
mandag 04 Februar 2008 skrev Steve Mitcham: > I am using NMock2 in production work for over a dozen fielded projects > and have used both TDD and post code unit tests using NMock2 on > different projects. > > > > NMock2 is limited to mocking interfaces only, so if you have the need to > mock abstract classes or full classes, then you'll have to look at the > other mocking frameworks. What would that those be? Regards Mads -- Med venlig hilsen/Regards Systemudvikler/Systemsdeveloper cand.scient.dat, Ph.d., Mads Bondo Dydensborg Dansk BiblioteksCenter A/S, Tempovej 7-11, 2750 Ballerup, Tlf. +45 44 86 77 34 |
From: Mike M. <mg...@es...> - 2008-02-05 18:57:14
|
I've used NMock on two significant projects (one for a Big Software Company that you would have heard of) with dozens of developers and thousands of tests and have been very happy with it. Remember, it's test code, not production code, already! ;-) |
From: Steve M. <Ste...@ty...> - 2008-02-04 20:27:56
|
I am using NMock2 in production work for over a dozen fielded projects and have used both TDD and post code unit tests using NMock2 on different projects. NMock2 is limited to mocking interfaces only, so if you have the need to mock abstract classes or full classes, then you'll have to look at the other mocking frameworks. Otherwise, Nmock2 is a solid, lightweight choice. From: nmo...@li... [mailto:nmo...@li...] On Behalf Of Collazo Mojica, Xabriel Sent: Monday, February 04, 2008 2:21 PM To: nmo...@li... Subject: [NMock2-Dev] Is Nmock 2 production ready? Hi, I made a search on this but just got two very old threads. Im my company we are trying to implement a TDD process, and I would very much like to use Nmock as an example of how powerful this approach could be. So, can anyone comment on Nmock 2 stability? Thanks, regards, Xabriel J. Collazo-Mojica MPROC Software Engineering Team ________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________ CONFIDENTIALITY AND PRIVACY NOTICE Information transmitted by this email is proprietary to Medtronic and is intended for use only by the individual or entity to which it is addressed, and may contain information that is private, privileged, confidential or exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you are not the intended recipient or it appears that this mail has been forwarded to you without proper authority, you are notified that any use or dissemination of this information in any manner is strictly prohibited. In such cases, please delete this mail from your records. To view this notice in other languages you can either select the following link or manually copy and paste the link into the address bar of a web browser: http://emaildisclaimer.medtronic.com |
From: Collazo M. X. <xab...@me...> - 2008-02-04 20:20:55
|
Hi, I made a search on this but just got two very old threads. Im my company we are trying to implement a TDD process, and I would very much like to use Nmock as an example of how powerful this approach could be. So, can anyone comment on Nmock 2 stability? Thanks, regards, Xabriel J. Collazo-Mojica MPROC Software Engineering Team ___________________________________________________________________________________________________ CONFIDENTIALITY AND PRIVACY NOTICE Information transmitted by this email is proprietary to Medtronic and is intended for use only by the individual or entity to which it is addressed, and may contain information that is private, privileged, confidential or exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you are not the intended recipient or it appears that this mail has been forwarded to you without proper authority, you are notified that any use or dissemination of this information in any manner is strictly prohibited. In such cases, please delete this mail from your records. To view this notice in other languages you can either select the following link or manually copy and paste the link into the address bar of a web browser: http://emaildisclaimer.medtronic.com |
From: Michael A. <at...@am...> - 2008-02-02 04:40:00
|
We recently upgraded to NMock2 RC2 but found a regression when mocking an interface with a generic method. Attempting to generate a mock for an interface like: public interface IWithGenericMethods { T ReadVariable<T>(string name); void SetVariable<T>(string name, T val); } throws the following exception: failed: System.TypeLoadException : Signature of the body and declaration in a method implementation do not match. Type: 'MockObjectType1'. Assembly: 'MockObjects, Version=0.0.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=null'. at System.Reflection.Emit.TypeBuilder._TermCreateClass(Int32 handle, Module module) at System.Reflection.Emit.TypeBuilder.CreateTypeNoLock() at System.Reflection.Emit.TypeBuilder.CreateType() C:\Software\RIA\ThirdPartyLibraries\NMock2\nmock2\src\NMock2\Monitoring\MockObjectFactory.cs(153,0): at NMock2.Monitoring.MockObjectFactory.CreateType(String typeName, Type mockedType) C:\nmock2\src\NMock2\Monitoring\MockObjectFactory.cs(137,0): at NMock2.Monitoring.MockObjectFactory.GetMockedType(TypeId id1, Type mockedType) C:\nmock2\src\NMock2\Monitoring\MockObjectFactory.cs(120,0): at NMock2.Monitoring.MockObjectFactory.CreateMockObject(Mockery mockery, Type mockedType, String name) C:\nmock2\src\NMock2\Mockery.cs(53,0): at NMock2.Mockery.NewMock(Type mockedType, String name) The exception occurs because NMock2.Monitoring.MockObjectFactory.PrepareMethodGenerator() does not define the generic parameters on the MethodBuilder for needed for generic methods. I was able to patch a local copy to correct this problem using an example from the Spring.NET project. The relevant code is on line 195-219 of http://springnet.cvs.sourceforge.net/springnet/Spring.Net/src/Spring/Spring.Core/Proxy/AbstractProxyMethodBuilder.cs?revision=1.6&view=markup (The ReflectionUtils.GetGenericParameterNames() method referenced by that code simply returns an array of strings built from the Type.Name array passed in) Hopefully the NMock2 source can be patched to correct this problem before the next release. Thanks for all of the recent improvements, Mike Attili Amaxo, Inc. |