cppunit-devel

[Cppunit-devel] Is this project dead?

[Summerwill, B. <BSu...@eu...>]

I was very pleased to see that CppUnit had been updated this summer,
following the suggested improvements on the WikiWikiWeb.  The activity stats
show the rapid decline in August and September.  Is there going to be a new
release in the near future?  Are patches or suggestions being examined?  Is
anyone there?
 
 
Cheers,
Bob

Re: [Cppunit-devel] Is this project dead?

[Bastiaan B. <bas...@li...>]

Hi Bob,

Open Source projects don't die, they just fade away into obsolence :-)

To answer your question: I plan to build a new release soon (this 
weekend or next week). Unfortunately that probably will my last release 
at the same time: when I took up maintainership of CppUnit half a year 
ago, I' was planning to use very soon, but things worked out 
differently. Maintaining a package you don't use your self turns out to 
be neither efficient nor effective. So I'm looking for someone to take 
over my job. A 'help wanted' request will be attached to the next release.
I would like to add that Baptiste and Steven have performed a large 
chunk of the work in the recent releases. I do not know how much time 
they can or want to devote to CppUnit in the future however. Such are 
the difficulties of volunteer based projects....
If you like to help, don't hesitate to say so!

Regards,

Bastiaan
 
Summerwill, Bob wrote:

> I was very pleased to see that CppUnit had been updated this summer, 
> following the suggested improvements on the WikiWikiWeb.  The activity 
> stats show the rapid decline in August and September.  Is there going 
> to be a new release in the near future?  Are patches or suggestions 
> being examined?  Is anyone there?
>
>  
>
>  
>
> Cheers,
>
> Bob
>

Re: [Cppunit-devel] Is this project dead?

[Steve M. R. <ste...@vi...>]

On Thu, Sep 13, 2001 at 11:44:54PM +0200, Bastiaan Bakker wrote:

> To answer your question: I plan to build a new release soon (this 
> weekend or next week). 

Hi Bastiaan: I have to confess that I screwed with a couple of things
in CVS way back in July and haven't put them right yet.  Following the
discussions on test fixtures, I introduced TestFixture.h and intended
to recode TestCase to use it.  Unfortunately, I got distracted and
haven't finished all that work yet.  If you prefer to revert these
changes, I won't be offended.  In fact, I have been planning to revert
the change myself.  I'll try to do so this weekend, unless I hear
otherwise from you.


> Unfortunately that probably will my last release 
> at the same time: when I took up maintainership of CppUnit half a year 
> ago, I' was planning to use very soon, but things worked out 
> differently. Maintaining a package you don't use your self turns out to 
> be neither efficient nor effective. So I'm looking for someone to take 
> over my job. A 'help wanted' request will be attached to the next release.
> I would like to add that Baptiste and Steven have performed a large 
> chunk of the work in the recent releases. I do not know how much time 
> they can or want to devote to CppUnit in the future however. 

I'm here.  I'm still interested in CppUnit development: I've been
using CppUnit for my coding since June.  One reason that I haven't
done any work on cppunit is that I have gotten used to many of its
quirks.

If no-one else volunteers, I can certainly make releases of
CppUnit.  I'm still around to work on CVS, in any case.

-Steve

-- 
by Rocket to the Moon,
by Airplane to the Rocket,
by Taxi to the Airport,
by Frontdoor to the Taxi,
by throwing back the blanket and laying down the legs ...
- They Might Be Giants

Re: [Cppunit-devel] Is this project dead?

[Baptiste L. <bl...@cl...>]

----- Original Message -----
From: "Steve M. Robbins" <ste...@vi...>
To: "Baptiste Lepilleur" <bl...@cl...>
Cc: "Bastiaan Bakker" <bas...@li...>
Sent: Friday, September 14, 2001 10:35 PM
Subject: Re: [Cppunit-devel] Is this project dead?

[...]

> >     What mess are you refering to ?
>
> I was thinking particularly of the documentation when I wrote that.
> The main reason to introduce a "fixture" class is to simplify and
> rationalize the documentation.  I only got partway into incorporating
> the Fixture class, and the documentation was either left as-is or
> commented out.  In short: it is a mess.
>
> It's been a while since I looked at this stuff, but my impression is
> that it is quicker to just back out of the change than to go forward.
[...]
> > The HelperMacros needs to be update though.
>
> Yes, probably.  I only use the CPPUNIT_TEST_SUITE, CPPUNIT_TEST,
> CPPUNIT_TEST_SUITE_END, and CPPUNIT_TEST_SUITE_REGISTRATION.  They
> work, but I have no clue about the other macros.

    The guilty is the registerTests() method defined in CPPUNIT_TEST_SUITE.
It take a TestFactory as a second parameter, and use that factory to
instantiate the fixture. This factory is declared in the CPPUNIT_TEST_END
macro. All this is done to allow a fixture that subclass another one to call
its parent fixture registerTests() method while passing its factory that
will instantiate the subclass fixture, and not the parent fixture, for each
test case.
    This mecanism was introduced somewhere after CppUnit 1.5.5 I think, to
replace the use of method which are ill supported (It need a workaround just
to compile with VC++).
    Since the fixture won't be Test anymore, we won't be able to use the
TestFactory as a base class for factory. That why I planned to introduce a
TestFixture class.

> > I was planning to introduce a TestFixtureFactory to replace the existing
> > TestFactory since Test can't be used as a base class for TestFixture
> > anymore.
> >
> >     May be those change should be postponed after the release ?
>
> At this point, I think it would be fastest to back out of all the
> fixture stuff and make the release.  Reorganizing the architecture
> turned out to be a much bigger job than I had expected.
    OK, let's postpone TestFixture stuff after the release. In addition
to the doc, the examples should also be updated (they all use TestCase as a
base class).

> P.S.  By offering to maintain CppUnit in my message yesterday, I was
> in no way trying to pre-empt anyone.  If Baptiste or anyone else wants
> the job, they can have it.  I have far too many other things to do.  I
> offer myself as a candidate of last resort ;-) because I do want to
> see CppUnit continue development.
    Unfortunately, I don't have the skill to maintain a Unix project. I know
how to build a project, but I barely have a  clue about maintaining those
configure/makefile script.

    Baptiste.
---
Baptiste Lepilleur <gai...@fr...>   http://gaiacrtn.free.fr/index.html
Author of The Text Reformatter, a tool for fanfiction readers and writers.
Language: English, French (Well, I'm French).

Re: [Cppunit-devel] Coming release (was: Is this project dead?)

[Baptiste L. <bl...@cl...>]

> Okay, then.  For the unix side, I think everything is basically there.
> I will check that it works on IRIX and maybe freebsd if I get the
> time, but I don't anticipate changing anything other than READMEs,
> NEWS and minor release stuff.
>
> However, I know nothing about the MS windows side of things.
> Baptiste?  Can you check things out and let me know whether
> anything needs fixing?

    Well, I just did some major clean up in the different configurations for
all the projects in CppUnit (was somewhat a mess). That means that
everything should compile fine this time. Also added a small install guide
for VC++: INSTALL-WIN32.txt (by the way, I added it to EXTRA_DIST in
makefile.am, was that the correct things to do?). Could you also apply the
process to convert EOL to DOS format when making the dist  (as is done for
*.dsw and *.dsp files)?

    I like it if another VC++ user could grab the last CVS version and get a
rain check on this. For the last release it compiled fine for me, but not
everybody ! Any volunteer ?

    I went trough the bug reports, and corrected somes (#448363, #448332).
Many reported bugs have already been fixed since release 1.5.5 (I'm closing
them). Has the MIPSPro patch been included ? And what about the report that
it does not compile with gcc 3.0 ?

    Still haven't heard from Patrick about the DSPlugIn (can't get it to
work with VC++). But that is not a blocking issue (we just can not use that
functionnality).

    I will try that version of CppUnit tomorrow at work where I have better
test suites.

    Baptiste.
---
Baptiste Lepilleur <gai...@fr...>   http://gaiacrtn.free.fr/index.html
Author of The Text Reformatter, a tool for fanfiction readers and writers.
Language: English, French (Well, I'm French).

Re: [Cppunit-devel] Coming release (was: Is this project dead?)

[Steve M. R. <ste...@vi...>]

On Mon, Sep 17, 2001 at 11:41:57PM +0200, Baptiste Lepilleur wrote:

> > However, I know nothing about the MS windows side of things.
> > Baptiste?  Can you check things out and let me know whether
> > anything needs fixing?
> 
>     Well, I just did some major clean up in the different configurations for
> all the projects in CppUnit (was somewhat a mess). That means that
> everything should compile fine this time.

Great!

> Also added a small install guide
> for VC++: INSTALL-WIN32.txt (by the way, I added it to EXTRA_DIST in
> makefile.am, was that the correct things to do?). 

Yup.

> Could you also apply the
> process to convert EOL to DOS format when making the dist  (as is done for
> *.dsw and *.dsp files)?

For INSTALL-WIN32 only?  Or for everything?

 
>     I went trough the bug reports, and corrected somes (#448363, #448332).
> Many reported bugs have already been fixed since release 1.5.5 (I'm closing
> them). Has the MIPSPro patch been included ?

Don't think so.  I'll deal with this.

> And what about the report that
> it does not compile with gcc 3.0 ?

Weird.  I have built cppunit using GCC 3.0 on IRIX.
That bug report is not spectacularly useful.  Is there some way
we can contact the submitter to ask for more info?

 
-S

-- 
by Rocket to the Moon,
by Airplane to the Rocket,
by Taxi to the Airport,
by Frontdoor to the Taxi,
by throwing back the blanket and laying down the legs ...
- They Might Be Giants