Re: [Cppunit-devel] FAQ / 1.8 branch

[Baptiste L. <gai...@fr...>]

Quoting "Steve M. Robbins" <ste...@vi...>:

> On Tue, Sep 25, 2001 at 05:54:02PM +0200, Baptiste Lepilleur wrote:
> > Quoting "Steve M. Robbins" <ste...@vi...>:
> >   Yes, linking to the doc would be interesting. Can Doxygen generate a
> TOC ?
> 
> Mmmm.  If it does, I don't know how to do that.
> You can, however, make "groups" of bits of documentation, and
> you automatically get a "group" page.  That might be good enough.
> 
> But, anyway, we have only three questions at this point.  Let's just
> do _something_ now and figure out the niceties if it gets to be a
> burden.
> 
>  
> > > >   How do we go reporting fix into the 1.8.0 branch ?
> > > 
> > > Well, since there is no branch done yet, everything on the "main"
> > > trunk will appear in both the 1.6.1 and 1.8.0 release.  So please
> > > do commit bugfixes onto the CVS tree.
> > > 
> > > Once a branch is made, then the procedure is: checkout the 1.6
> branch,
> > > make the change, commit it.  Then check out the main branch and
> merge
> > > in the change just made on the 1.6 branch.  This is a mildly more
> > > difficult procedure, so I am delaying making a 1.6 branch in order
> > > that we can continue to use the simpler procedure.  
> > > 
> > > We can delay a 1.6 branch until we need to make 1.8-only changes
> to
> > > CVS.  I thought we'd give it a week or so, until the bugfixes die
> > > down.  What do you think?
> > 
> >   Well, I already have some features (CPPUNIT_TEST_EXCEPTION) I would 
> > like to 
> > add (I would target 1.8.0 for the end of next week. Expected exception
> and 
> > named suite registration only would be worth it).
> 
> Well, so far, we aren't exactly inundated with bug reports.  So making
> the change at the end of next week is probably fine.
> 
> At any rate, ONCE the branch is made, the idea is to merge 1.6.x
> bugfix changes to the main trunk (if applicable) as you do them.
> Any delay of the merge just makes it more complicated.

  Well, I was thinking about a slighlty tighter time schedule :-)
  - have the branch made this week-end, and 
  - release 1.8.0 by the end of next week-end...

  Given that scope, the following feature would be possible:
    1) CPPUNIT_TEST_EXCEPTION( method, ExceptionType)
    2) CPPUNIT_TEST_FAIL( method )
    3) add a flag to TestFailure distinguishing error/failure, retain only
one collection to store result
(see other mail)
    4) CPPUNIT_TEST_SUITE_NAMED_REGISTRATION( TestFixtureType, SuiteName ) :
register the fixture's suite in a suite of the specified name.
    
  Given the low rate of feedback on the other topics, I can't see them being 
done "quickly". So I'd rather have a quick release with those features which 
are simple but very useful.

   I'm also thinking of adding:

   CPPUNIT_FAIL( message ) as a shortcut for
CPPUNIT_ASSERT_MESSAGE( message, false ), which is often use to indicate 
unexpected path (exception...)

> 
> -Steve
> 
> P.S. I guess the lack of bug reports is good, unless it means that
> nobody is using CppUnit.  We are getting a bunch of traffic though:
> check out the "stats" page if you haven't already done so.

  Indeed, it's been quite a climb...

  By the way, has xprogramming.org been contacted, the page haven't been 
updated ?

  Baptiste.

---
Baptiste Lepilleur <gai...@fr...>
http://gaiacrtn.free.fr/index.html
Language: English, French