You can subscribe to this list here.
2000 |
Jan
|
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
|
Jul
(130) |
Aug
(72) |
Sep
(151) |
Oct
(75) |
Nov
(71) |
Dec
(89) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
2001 |
Jan
(58) |
Feb
(156) |
Mar
(157) |
Apr
(137) |
May
(48) |
Jun
(13) |
Jul
(25) |
Aug
(36) |
Sep
(25) |
Oct
(38) |
Nov
(18) |
Dec
(75) |
2002 |
Jan
(14) |
Feb
(113) |
Mar
(39) |
Apr
(8) |
May
(58) |
Jun
(42) |
Jul
(28) |
Aug
(41) |
Sep
(15) |
Oct
(33) |
Nov
(42) |
Dec
(18) |
2003 |
Jan
(22) |
Feb
(63) |
Mar
(50) |
Apr
(31) |
May
(128) |
Jun
(51) |
Jul
(57) |
Aug
(32) |
Sep
(22) |
Oct
(110) |
Nov
(46) |
Dec
(22) |
2004 |
Jan
(10) |
Feb
(6) |
Mar
|
Apr
(42) |
May
(33) |
Jun
(11) |
Jul
(11) |
Aug
(37) |
Sep
(21) |
Oct
(20) |
Nov
(20) |
Dec
(9) |
2005 |
Jan
(30) |
Feb
(51) |
Mar
(20) |
Apr
(7) |
May
(21) |
Jun
(23) |
Jul
(4) |
Aug
(4) |
Sep
(22) |
Oct
(10) |
Nov
|
Dec
(55) |
2006 |
Jan
(25) |
Feb
(15) |
Mar
(16) |
Apr
(7) |
May
(15) |
Jun
(16) |
Jul
(21) |
Aug
(5) |
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
(4) |
Dec
(13) |
2007 |
Jan
(15) |
Feb
(15) |
Mar
(32) |
Apr
(17) |
May
(26) |
Jun
(1) |
Jul
(8) |
Aug
(2) |
Sep
(3) |
Oct
(7) |
Nov
(3) |
Dec
(6) |
2008 |
Jan
(20) |
Feb
(4) |
Mar
(13) |
Apr
(8) |
May
(14) |
Jun
|
Jul
(1) |
Aug
(3) |
Sep
(3) |
Oct
|
Nov
(5) |
Dec
|
2009 |
Jan
|
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
(15) |
Nov
(30) |
Dec
|
2010 |
Jan
|
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
|
Jul
(2) |
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
|
2011 |
Jan
|
Feb
|
Mar
(1) |
Apr
(12) |
May
|
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
(15) |
2012 |
Jan
|
Feb
|
Mar
(1) |
Apr
|
May
(8) |
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
(2) |
Oct
(5) |
Nov
|
Dec
|
2013 |
Jan
(1) |
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
(5) |
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
(2) |
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
|
2014 |
Jan
|
Feb
(1) |
Mar
(1) |
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
|
2015 |
Jan
(12) |
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
(2) |
Jun
(1) |
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
|
From: Craig P. <cap...@us...> - 2011-12-05 16:24:21
|
> Can you briefly highlith the differences as well as potential impact > on existing code. Sure. From top to bottom: * Added {$IFDEF FPC} block to turn on {$MODE DELPHI} and the PUREPASCAL define. * Fixed CallerAddr's declaration to use {$IFDEF PUREPASCAL} instead of {$IFDEF CLR} around the "assembler" statement. This just makes it match the implementation block. * Added "unix" to implementation uses clause when appropriate, needed for fpgettimeofday. * Added NativeInt type declaration in the implementation section for cases where it isn't available or is declared incorrectly (Delphi 2009 and earlier, FreePascal 2.4). * InitPerformanceCounter/QueryPerformanceCounter (unix) use FreePascal's fpgettimeofday rather than libc's gettimeofday (in $IFDEF). * Stubbed out CheckMethodIsNotEmpty for FPC. The byte read was causing a crash, but I didn't look into it further, and I did this before I realized TMethodEnumerator was broken, so this change might not be necessary. * Implemented FPC-specific version of TMethodEnumerator.Create. * In CreateRegistry I removed the non-CLR codepath, so it always uses ParamStr(0) instead of calling GetModuleFilename. At least under Delph 7+/Kylix 3, ParamStr(0) already uses GetModuleFilename, rather than returning the real command line parameter, so there /shouldn't/ be a change in functionality here. The CreateRegistry change is the only one that could conceivably affect existing code, though I don't know how. Everything else is in an {$IFDEF FPC} or similar block. I haven't gotten DUnit's own tests to compile under FreePascal yet, but the Abbrevia testsuite works fine. All of the tests still pass under Delphi XE2. -- Craig Peterson Scooter Software |
From: Craig P. <cr...@sc...> - 2011-12-05 15:24:24
|
> Can you briefly highlith the differences as well as potential impact > on existing code. Sure. From top to bottom: * Added {$IFDEF FPC} block to turn on {$MODE DELPHI} and the PUREPASCAL define. * Fixed CallerAddr's declaration to use {$IFDEF PUREPASCAL} instead of {$IFDEF CLR} around the "assembler" statement. This just makes it match the implementation block. * Added "unix" to implementation uses clause when appropriate, needed for fpgettimeofday. * Added NativeInt type declaration in the implementation section for cases where it isn't available or is declared incorrectly (Delphi 2009 and earlier, FreePascal 2.4). * InitPerformanceCounter/QueryPerformanceCounter (unix) use FreePascal's fpgettimeofday rather than libc's gettimeofday (in $IFDEF). * Stubbed out CheckMethodIsNotEmpty for FPC. The byte read was causing a crash, but I didn't look into it further, and I did this before I realized TMethodEnumerator was broken, so this change might not be necessary. * Implemented FPC-specific version of TMethodEnumerator.Create. * In CreateRegistry I removed the non-CLR codepath, so it always uses ParamStr(0) instead of calling GetModuleFilename. At least under Delph 7+/Kylix 3, ParamStr(0) already uses GetModuleFilename, rather than returning the real command line parameter, so there /shouldn't/ be a change in functionality here. The CreateRegistry change is the only one that could conceivably affect existing code, though I don't know how. Everything else is in an {$IFDEF FPC} or similar block. I haven't gotten DUnit's own tests to compile under FreePascal yet, but the Abbrevia testsuite works fine. All of the tests still pass under Delphi XE2. -- Craig Peterson Scooter Software |
From: Kris G. <krz...@ya...> - 2011-12-05 11:16:21
|
Hi Craig, Can you briefly highlith the differences as well as potential impact on existing code. Thanks From: Craig Peterson <cap...@us...> Subject: Re: [DUnit-interest] DUnit for FreePascal To: dun...@li... Date: Monday, 5 December, 2011, 4:08 I've uploaded a new version. Mark Edington's most recent commit uses NativeInt, which was non-existent or broken in Delphi 2009 and earlier and FPC 2.4. http://tpabbrevia.sourceforge.net/TestFramework.pas -- Craig Peterson Scooter Software ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ All the data continuously generated in your IT infrastructure contains a definitive record of customers, application performance, security threats, fraudulent activity, and more. Splunk takes this data and makes sense of it. IT sense. And common sense. http://p.sf.net/sfu/splunk-novd2d _______________________________________________ Dunit-interest mailing list Dun...@li... https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dunit-interest |
From: Craig P. <cap...@us...> - 2011-12-05 04:09:31
|
I've uploaded a new version. Mark Edington's most recent commit uses NativeInt, which was non-existent or broken in Delphi 2009 and earlier and FPC 2.4. http://tpabbrevia.sourceforge.net/TestFramework.pas -- Craig Peterson Scooter Software |
From: Craig P. <cap...@us...> - 2011-12-04 05:23:32
|
I have DUnit working with FreePascal. Tested on OS X, should work on Linux and Windows. Can someone with commit privileges take a look at it? The only thing I'm unsure of is the CreateRegistry simplification. Was there any reason why the non-CLR path used GetModuleFileName explicitly instead of ParamStr(0)? http://tpabbrevia.sourceforge.net/TestFramework.pas -- Craig Peterson Scooter Software |
From: Colin J. <col...@gm...> - 2011-04-26 13:26:06
|
Hello, On 26 April 2011 12:22, Jud Cole (SourceForge) <ju...@us...> wrote: > I've probably got the bandwidth to put together a 'release' ZIP file once > Mark has finished checking in all his Embarcadero changes (many thanks Mark > and Embarcadero) if people are interested - it has not been a recent > priority for us since CodeGear (and now Embarcadero) started including DUnit > with the Delphi releases, but there are now enough changes for it to be of > interest for all versions. > > Please let the list know if there is interest in a preliminary 9.4.0 Zip > file and if there is then I'll see what we can do, and how quickly! Given that there have been significant changes, it may be worth creating an updated ZIP file, especially for those who may find SVN still a hurdle to jump over. For me, getting it directly from the repo is still the best way :) > > Unfortunately I just don't have the bandwidth to look at merging DUnit2 or > DUnitLite at this time, but if someone else is up for it then let's talk. Having briefly looked at the source code for both DUnit and DUnit2, I think bandwidth is the very least of the problems with regards to merging the two code bases. For all intents and purposes, writing tests using DUnit and DUnit2 are mostly the same but, under the hood, the code and classes in DUnit2 are significantly changed and in Peter McNab's own words "has largely been re-written." (http://members.optusnet.com.au/mcnabp/Projects/DUnit2/ReadMe.txt). Based on my limited and cursory view of the code, merging is not really a straight out option. What is required is a group who is familiar with both frameworks to jot down the pros and cons and differences of each framework. Based on this information, find out what is required to add the missing features to either DUnit or DUnit2. Whichever framework is the least complicated and easiest to manage in making the transition should be the base code in moving forward for a unified DUnit framework. At least it will provide a sort of roadmap with regards to the future direction. I'm not trying to say one framework is better than the other but it would be good to have all contributors working on the one framework rather than having good features being sprinkled between both frameworks. I would really hate the idea of having to use one framework to do one set of tests and then using the other framework to do the other set of tests. Cheers, Colin |
From: Jud C. (SourceForge) <ju...@us...> - 2011-04-26 02:35:31
|
<!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"> Hello all,<br> <br> Like Juanco, I've not had a need to update DUnit in a while, but I do still use it, I do watch and read all the messages on the lists, and I do clear the spam from the mailing lists every week or so.<br> <br> I've probably got the bandwidth to put together a 'release' ZIP file once Mark has finished checking in all his Embarcadero changes (many thanks Mark and Embarcadero) if people are interested - it has not been a recent priority for us since CodeGear (and now Embarcadero) started including DUnit with the Delphi releases, but there are now enough changes for it to be of interest for all versions.<br> <br> Please let the list know if there is interest in a preliminary 9.4.0 Zip file and if there is then I'll see what we can do, and how quickly!<br> <br> Unfortunately I just don't have the bandwidth to look at merging DUnit2 or DUnitLite at this time, but if someone else is up for it then let's talk.<br> <br> All the best,<br> <br> Jud<br> <br> <br> On 4/25/2011 1:25 PM, Fernando Macedo wrote: <blockquote cite="mid:BANLkTi=Oes...@ma..." type="cite"> <div>Hello all,</div> <div><br> </div> <div>This is my first post on this list.</div> <div><br> </div> <div>I'm from Brazil, working on a small team (5 members), with scrum and TDD pratics.</div> <div><br> </div> <div>We are using dUnit since Delphi 5. Today whe're running Delphi 2010 w/ <a moz-do-not-send="true" href="http://sourceforge.net/projects/dunit2/">dUnit2</a>, <a moz-do-not-send="true" href="http://code.google.com/p/dunitlite/">dUnitLite</a>, and <a moz-do-not-send="true" href="http://sourceforge.net/projects/pascalmock/">PascalMock</a>.</div> <div><br> </div> <div>We've made some customizations on dUnitLite to compile it on D2010, since the original author had left the Delphi community.</div> <div><br> </div> <div>Wo already have seen others frameworks of the xUnit family, knows that there are many ways to do test on source code.</div> <div><br> </div> <div>I really want do see the full power of new language resources on D2010+ at the dUnit2 project.</div> <div><br> </div> <div>Some improvements:</div> <div> <ul> <li>Tags on TestCases to specify horizontal related tests across multiple suits. With the ability to select Tags to run on the GUI interface.</li> <li>"BDD like" specifications (dUnitLite).</li> </ul> </div> <div>Tks,</div> <br clear="all"> "Somos o que repetidamente fazemos; a excelência, portanto, não é um feito, mas sim um hábito!" - Aristóteles<br> <br> <br> <div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, Apr 25, 2011 at 1:57 PM, Juancarlo Añez <span dir="ltr"><<a moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:ap...@gm...">ap...@gm...</a>></span> wrote:<br> <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;"> <br> <br> <div class="gmail_quote">On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 7:31 PM, Mark Edington (Embarcadero) <span dir="ltr"><<a moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:med...@us..." target="_blank">med...@us...</a>></span> wrote:<br> <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;"> DUnit has been mature for some time now. </blockquote> </div> <br> That may be the key. I personally haven't needed changes in DUnit for a very long time. That's why I've spent my energy elsewhere.<br> <br> If it ain't broken, don fixt it.<br clear="all"> <br> -- <br> <font color="#888888"><span style="color: rgb(0, 102, 0);">Juancarlo </span><b style="color: rgb(0, 102, 0);">Añez</b></font><br> </blockquote> </div> <br> </blockquote> </body> </html> |
From: Fernando M. <fgm...@gm...> - 2011-04-25 17:26:23
|
Hello all, This is my first post on this list. I'm from Brazil, working on a small team (5 members), with scrum and TDD pratics. We are using dUnit since Delphi 5. Today whe're running Delphi 2010 w/ dUnit2 <http://sourceforge.net/projects/dunit2/>, dUnitLite<http://code.google.com/p/dunitlite/>, and PascalMock <http://sourceforge.net/projects/pascalmock/>. We've made some customizations on dUnitLite to compile it on D2010, since the original author had left the Delphi community. Wo already have seen others frameworks of the xUnit family, knows that there are many ways to do test on source code. I really want do see the full power of new language resources on D2010+ at the dUnit2 project. Some improvements: - Tags on TestCases to specify horizontal related tests across multiple suits. With the ability to select Tags to run on the GUI interface. - "BDD like" specifications (dUnitLite). Tks, "Somos o que repetidamente fazemos; a excelência, portanto, não é um feito, mas sim um hábito!" - Aristóteles On Mon, Apr 25, 2011 at 1:57 PM, Juancarlo Añez <ap...@gm...> wrote: > > > On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 7:31 PM, Mark Edington (Embarcadero) < > med...@us...> wrote: > >> DUnit has been mature for some time now. > > > That may be the key. I personally haven't needed changes in DUnit for a > very long time. That's why I've spent my energy elsewhere. > > If it ain't broken, don fixt it. > > -- > Juancarlo *Añez* > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > WhatsUp Gold - Download Free Network Management Software > The most intuitive, comprehensive, and cost-effective network > management toolset available today. Delivers lowest initial > acquisition cost and overall TCO of any competing solution. > http://p.sf.net/sfu/whatsupgold-sd > _______________________________________________ > Dunit-interest mailing list > Dun...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dunit-interest > > |
From: Juancarlo A. <ap...@gm...> - 2011-04-25 16:57:57
|
On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 7:31 PM, Mark Edington (Embarcadero) < med...@us...> wrote: > DUnit has been mature for some time now. That may be the key. I personally haven't needed changes in DUnit for a very long time. That's why I've spent my energy elsewhere. If it ain't broken, don fixt it. -- Juancarlo *Añez* |
From: Mark E. (Embarcadero) <med...@us...> - 2011-04-21 00:18:51
|
Hi Juanco. I see you've managed to spark some interest on the list. Good show! On 4/17/2011 10:42 AM, Juancarlo Añez wrote: > It's a contradiction that Embarcadero has contributed the manpower for > as many changes, and yet it says it lacks the manpower. "Lacking manpower" isn't how I would characterize the situation. The changes I recently committed were a collection of a couple of years worth of bug fixes. They really are not that extensive. These changes were made by individual contributors to facilitate the use of DUnit internally, but are also relevant for the rest of the DUnit community. The main reason for submitting these changes was to simply the job of keeping our local copy of DUnit in sync with the version on SourceForge. On 4/15/2011 4:39 PM, Juancarlo Añez wrote: > I'm wondering if it would not be best for Embarcadero to take hold of > the source code (fork it), rename it, and relaunch it as open source > using a more modern platform (GitHub, Bitbucket, etc.), and new rules > for encouraging and accepting contributions. DUnit has been mature for some time now. Given the lack of activity on this mailing list I don't have the impression that a "relaunch" is something the existing community is seeking. In terms of moving the project forward I personally would like to see the DUnit2 changes merged in to the existing trunk if that can be done in a way that maintains a high level of compatibility with the existing framework. Some discussion took place regarding this last year on the mailing list, but that is as far as things went. I'm not speaking as an "official" representative of Embarcadero, but I will say that there is interest internally in promoting unit testing in future releases of Rad Studio. If at some point that involves making enhancements to DUnit, that is likely the time you'll see the company become more involved in the project. Mark |
From: Juancarlo A. <ap...@gm...> - 2011-04-17 17:43:12
|
On Sun, Apr 17, 2011 at 10:42 AM, Craig Peterson < cap...@us...> wrote: > DUnit, and Mark just finished committing Embarcadero's outstanding > changes to the repository Saturday. He has said (off list) that > Embarcadero doesn't have the manpower to actively maintain DUnit right > now though. > It's a contradiction that Embarcadero has contributed the manpower for as many changes, and yet it says it lacks the manpower. I have the manpower, but I won't work on DUnitX because I don't need to. I'm fine with the features present years past, I use Delphi 7, and I don't plan to upgrade. It would be good if DUnit was adopted by someone that still cares. That's all. -- Juanca |
From: Robert L. <rl...@pe...> - 2011-04-17 15:42:21
|
DUnit, if you look at the latest commits there are recent updates from Mark, including changes for upcoming 64bit support. On 4/17/11, Juancarlo Añez <ap...@gm...> wrote: > On Sun, Apr 17, 2011 at 12:46 AM, Colin Johnsun <col...@gm...>wrote: > >> DUnit2 was forked from DUnit around version 9.3 or 9.4. Since then >> there have been many updates to both frameworks. There was talk of >> bringing them both back into a single framework but my fear is that >> they may have become too divergent. If there is any chance for merging >> the two frameworks, it would require the developers of both frameworks >> to meet at some common ground and work towards that end. >> > > > Which version is Embarcadero modifying and distributing? > > -- > Juancarlo *Añez* > -- Sent from my mobile device |
From: Craig P. <cap...@us...> - 2011-04-17 15:12:19
|
On 4/17/2011 9:50 AM, Juancarlo Añez wrote: > Which version is Embarcadero modifying and distributing? DUnit, and Mark just finished committing Embarcadero's outstanding changes to the repository Saturday. He has said (off list) that Embarcadero doesn't have the manpower to actively maintain DUnit right now though. -- Craig Peterson Scooter Software |
From: Juancarlo A. <ap...@gm...> - 2011-04-17 14:50:41
|
On Sun, Apr 17, 2011 at 12:46 AM, Colin Johnsun <col...@gm...>wrote: > DUnit2 was forked from DUnit around version 9.3 or 9.4. Since then > there have been many updates to both frameworks. There was talk of > bringing them both back into a single framework but my fear is that > they may have become too divergent. If there is any chance for merging > the two frameworks, it would require the developers of both frameworks > to meet at some common ground and work towards that end. > Which version is Embarcadero modifying and distributing? -- Juancarlo *Añez* |
From: Colin J. <col...@gm...> - 2011-04-17 05:16:55
|
This is my concern, DUnit2 was forked from DUnit around version 9.3 or 9.4. Since then there have been many updates to both frameworks. There was talk of bringing them both back into a single framework but my fear is that they may have become too divergent. If there is any chance for merging the two frameworks, it would require the developers of both frameworks to meet at some common ground and work towards that end. In the meantime, it looks like any talk of merging the frameworks will remain in the background for the foreseeable future. As Robert has stated there has been many improvements made in DUnit2 and it would be good to see these changes make it back into the original framework. Regards, Colin On 17 April 2011 11:49, Robert Love <rl...@pe...> wrote: > Why would a fork be needed? Why can't Dunit just evolve using the > contributions from embarcadero and others. The DUnit2 code base has > many improvements that could be integrated back in.. > > > On Fri, Apr 15, 2011 at 5:39 PM, Juancarlo Añez > <jua...@gm...> wrote: >> Mark Edington, >> >> I've seen the considerable contributions CodeGear/Embarcadero have done to >> the DUnit source base. >> >> I'm wondering if it would not be best for Embarcadero to take hold of the >> source code (fork it), rename it, and relaunch it as open source using a >> more modern platform (GitHub, Bitbucket, etc.), and new rules for >> encouraging and accepting contributions. >> >> -- >> Juancarlo Añez (a Delphi 7 user) >> >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> Benefiting from Server Virtualization: Beyond Initial Workload >> Consolidation -- Increasing the use of server virtualization is a top >> priority.Virtualization can reduce costs, simplify management, and improve >> application availability and disaster protection. Learn more about boosting >> the value of server virtualization. http://p.sf.net/sfu/vmware-sfdev2dev >> _______________________________________________ >> Dunit-interest mailing list >> Dun...@li... >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dunit-interest >> >> > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Benefiting from Server Virtualization: Beyond Initial Workload > Consolidation -- Increasing the use of server virtualization is a top > priority.Virtualization can reduce costs, simplify management, and improve > application availability and disaster protection. Learn more about boosting > the value of server virtualization. http://p.sf.net/sfu/vmware-sfdev2dev > _______________________________________________ > Dunit-interest mailing list > Dun...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dunit-interest > |
From: Robert L. <rl...@pe...> - 2011-04-17 02:13:56
|
Why would a fork be needed? Why can't Dunit just evolve using the contributions from embarcadero and others. The DUnit2 code base has many improvements that could be integrated back in.. On Fri, Apr 15, 2011 at 5:39 PM, Juancarlo Añez <jua...@gm...> wrote: > Mark Edington, > > I've seen the considerable contributions CodeGear/Embarcadero have done to > the DUnit source base. > > I'm wondering if it would not be best for Embarcadero to take hold of the > source code (fork it), rename it, and relaunch it as open source using a > more modern platform (GitHub, Bitbucket, etc.), and new rules for > encouraging and accepting contributions. > > -- > Juancarlo Añez (a Delphi 7 user) > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Benefiting from Server Virtualization: Beyond Initial Workload > Consolidation -- Increasing the use of server virtualization is a top > priority.Virtualization can reduce costs, simplify management, and improve > application availability and disaster protection. Learn more about boosting > the value of server virtualization. http://p.sf.net/sfu/vmware-sfdev2dev > _______________________________________________ > Dunit-interest mailing list > Dun...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dunit-interest > > |
From: Juancarlo A. <jua...@gm...> - 2011-04-15 23:39:26
|
Mark Edington, I've seen the considerable contributions CodeGear/Embarcadero have done to the DUnit source base. I'm wondering if it would not be best for Embarcadero to take hold of the source code (fork it), rename it, and relaunch it as open source using a more modern platform (GitHub, Bitbucket, etc.), and new rules for encouraging and accepting contributions. -- Juancarlo *Añez* (a Delphi 7 user) |
From: flecktor <fle...@ho...> - 2011-03-01 10:56:08
|
hi, I was wondering if there is any way to compare two text files (or TStringList) and show the diffrence in the dunit tool? thanks |
From: Paul S. <pv...@gm...> - 2010-07-08 04:44:39
|
Hi Mark, Sorry about the long absence. Life keeps getting in the way... Jarrod Hollingworth and I have been committing changes to the temporary dunit2 repository here: http://sourceforge.net/projects/dunit2/ <http://sourceforge.net/projects/dunit2/>Jarrod has been making extensions for GUI testing, and we are also adding a patch by Nicholas Ring to get XMLListener working under Delphi 2010. It is still our intention to move the code over to the dunit repository. Our daytime work situation has changed recently, but I hope we can commit the changes to the dunit repository in the next month. I did make a branch in dunit earlier in the year for further changes to the original dunit1 source. As there have been trunk changes in the last couple of months, I will create a new branch for dunit1 development immediately prior to committing the dunit2 changes to the trunk. Cheers, Paul. On Thu, Jul 8, 2010 at 5:46 AM, Mark Edington (Embarcadero) < med...@us...> wrote: > Hi Paul, > > I was wondering if you could give us a Status update on the DUnit2 merge. > > Thanks, > > Mark > > On 11/23/2009 2:30 PM, Paul Spain wrote: > > ok. I'm fine with that and will tag prior to commting any DUnit2-related > material on the trunk. > My concern was disrupting anybody working off the head - but I guess that's > life on the bleeding edge... > > Cheer, Paul. > > On Tue, Nov 24, 2009 at 7:14 AM, Mark Edington (Embarcadero) < > med...@us...> wrote: > >> On 11/23/2009 2:24 AM, Kris Golko wrote: >> >> I suggest we _tag_ the source after Embarcadero changes are complete. >> Then, we can procede with merging DUnit2 changes. >> >> I don't see a point in branching, as we don't need to develop two source >> streams. A tag can be used as a brach if such need arises. >> >> >> I don't have any other changes to commit from Embarcadero at this time. >> >> I'm inclined to agree with Kris about using a tag for DUnit1 instead of >> branching to do the DUnit2 the merge. It'll be less work that way and also >> keep the important change history on the trunk. >> >> Mark >> >> >> >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> Let Crystal Reports handle the reporting - Free Crystal Reports 2008 >> 30-Day >> trial. Simplify your report design, integration and deployment - and focus >> on >> what you do best, core application coding. Discover what's new with >> Crystal Reports now. http://p.sf.net/sfu/bobj-july >> _______________________________________________ >> Dunit-interest mailing list >> Dun...@li... >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dunit-interest >> >> > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > This SF.net email is sponsored by Sprint > What will you do first with EVO, the first 4G phone? > Visit sprint.com/first -- http://p.sf.net/sfu/sprint-com-first > _______________________________________________ > Dunit-interest mailing list > Dun...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dunit-interest > > |
From: Mark E. (Embarcadero) <med...@us...> - 2010-07-07 20:04:52
|
Hi Paul, I was wondering if you could give us a Status update on the DUnit2 merge. Thanks, Mark On 11/23/2009 2:30 PM, Paul Spain wrote: > ok. I'm fine with that and will tag prior to commting any > DUnit2-related material on the trunk. > My concern was disrupting anybody working off the head - but I guess > that's life on the bleeding edge... > > Cheer, Paul. > > On Tue, Nov 24, 2009 at 7:14 AM, Mark Edington (Embarcadero) > <med...@us... > <mailto:med...@us...>> wrote: > > On 11/23/2009 2:24 AM, Kris Golko wrote: >> I suggest we _tag_ the source after Embarcadero changes are >> complete. Then, we can procede with merging DUnit2 changes. >> I don't see a point in branching, as we don't need to develop two >> source streams. A tag can be used as a brach if such need arises. >> > > I don't have any other changes to commit from Embarcadero at this > time. > > I'm inclined to agree with Kris about using a tag for DUnit1 > instead of branching to do the DUnit2 the merge. It'll be less > work that way and also keep the important change history on the trunk. > > Mark > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Let Crystal Reports handle the reporting - Free Crystal Reports > 2008 30-Day > trial. Simplify your report design, integration and deployment - > and focus on > what you do best, core application coding. Discover what's new with > Crystal Reports now. http://p.sf.net/sfu/bobj-july > _______________________________________________ > Dunit-interest mailing list > Dun...@li... > <mailto:Dun...@li...> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dunit-interest > > |
From: Paul S. <pv...@gm...> - 2009-11-23 22:30:36
|
ok. I'm fine with that and will tag prior to commting any DUnit2-related material on the trunk. My concern was disrupting anybody working off the head - but I guess that's life on the bleeding edge... Cheer, Paul. On Tue, Nov 24, 2009 at 7:14 AM, Mark Edington (Embarcadero) < med...@us...> wrote: > On 11/23/2009 2:24 AM, Kris Golko wrote: > > I suggest we _tag_ the source after Embarcadero changes are complete. > Then, we can procede with merging DUnit2 changes. > > I don't see a point in branching, as we don't need to develop two source > streams. A tag can be used as a brach if such need arises. > > > I don't have any other changes to commit from Embarcadero at this time. > > I'm inclined to agree with Kris about using a tag for DUnit1 instead of > branching to do the DUnit2 the merge. It'll be less work that way and also > keep the important change history on the trunk. > > Mark > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Let Crystal Reports handle the reporting - Free Crystal Reports 2008 30-Day > trial. Simplify your report design, integration and deployment - and focus > on > what you do best, core application coding. Discover what's new with > Crystal Reports now. http://p.sf.net/sfu/bobj-july > _______________________________________________ > Dunit-interest mailing list > Dun...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dunit-interest > > |
From: Juancarlo A. <ap...@gm...> - 2009-11-23 21:00:42
|
FWIW, I agree with you too. --Juanca On Mon, Nov 23, 2009 at 3:44 PM, Mark Edington (Embarcadero) < med...@us...> wrote: > On 11/23/2009 2:24 AM, Kris Golko wrote: > > I suggest we _tag_ the source after Embarcadero changes are complete. > Then, we can procede with merging DUnit2 changes. > > I don't see a point in branching, as we don't need to develop two source > streams. A tag can be used as a brach if such need arises. > > > I don't have any other changes to commit from Embarcadero at this time. > > I'm inclined to agree with Kris about using a tag for DUnit1 instead of > branching to do the DUnit2 the merge. It'll be less work that way and also > keep the important change history on the trunk. > > Mark > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Let Crystal Reports handle the reporting - Free Crystal Reports 2008 30-Day > trial. Simplify your report design, integration and deployment - and focus > on > what you do best, core application coding. Discover what's new with > Crystal Reports now. http://p.sf.net/sfu/bobj-july > _______________________________________________ > Dunit-interest mailing list > Dun...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dunit-interest > > -- Juanca |
From: Mark E. (Embarcadero) <med...@us...> - 2009-11-23 20:14:32
|
On 11/23/2009 2:24 AM, Kris Golko wrote: > I suggest we _tag_ the source after Embarcadero changes are complete. > Then, we can procede with merging DUnit2 changes. > I don't see a point in branching, as we don't need to develop two > source streams. A tag can be used as a brach if such need arises. > I don't have any other changes to commit from Embarcadero at this time. I'm inclined to agree with Kris about using a tag for DUnit1 instead of branching to do the DUnit2 the merge. It'll be less work that way and also keep the important change history on the trunk. Mark |
From: Thierry B. <thi...@gm...> - 2009-11-23 19:55:43
|
Well, on front page http://dunit.sourceforge.net/ : > The following FAQ articles can be found on the SourceForge project page: > > * Where do I put my test code? > <https://sourceforge.net/docman/display_doc.php?docid=626&group_id=7592> > * How do I organize and execute all my test code?gcstar tags xml > <https://sourceforge.net/docman/display_doc.php?docid=627&group_id=7592> > * FAQ: How do I use TTestSetup and reference fixture instances > from test cases? > <https://sourceforge.net/docman/display_doc.php?docid=17331&group_id=7592> > And I found on https://sourceforge.net/apps/wordpress/sourceforge/2009/10/19/docman-and-task-manager-removal-complete-2009-10-19/ : > to request this data be migrated to one of our Hosted Apps > <http://sourceforge.net/apps/trac/sourceforge/wiki/Hosted%20Apps> > facilities. > > Users may also find a dump of this data in their project home > directory (/home/groups/P/PR/PROJECT – where “PROJECT” represents the > project UNIX name) for use in an off-site facility if so desired. > |
From: Kris G. <krz...@ya...> - 2009-11-23 10:24:57
|
Hi All, I suggest we _tag_ the source after Embarcadero changes are complete. Then, we can procede with merging DUnit2 changes. I don't see a point in branching, as we don't need to develop two source streams. A tag can be used as a brach if such need arises. Cheers --- En date de : Dim 22.11.09, Juancarlo Añez <ap...@gm...> a écrit : De: Juancarlo Añez <ap...@gm...> Objet: Re: [DUnit-interest] DUnit2 merge progress... À: pv...@gm..., "Users of the DUnit Xtreme testing framework for Delphi" <dun...@li...> Cc: "Mark Edington" <Mar...@em...> Date: Dimanche 22 Novembre 2009, 14h20 FWIW, there were changes made by CodeGear to the trunk a few days ago. I agree with creating a branch for DUnit2, and merging/adapting there changes to the trunk until DUnit2 can be released. --Juanca On Sun, Nov 22, 2009 at 8:12 AM, Paul Spain <pv...@gm...> wrote: Thanks Mark. I've been thinking about how best to do the merge. I think the least impact approach is to create a branch for the DUnit2 stuff, and merge that back to the trunk when its all reconciled. Knitting the documentation for both versions hasn't begun. As the next DUnit release will be the first in quite a while, it should be cohesive for any newcomers and those having another look. The trunk may be unusable for a while if the merging happens there. Anyone interesed in the DUnit2 code during the merge can always switch sandboxes to that branch. Any mods to DUnit1 inbetween times can continue in the trunk. Cheers, Paul. On Sat, Nov 21, 2009 at 1:20 PM, Mark Edington <Mar...@em...> wrote: > Hi Paul, > > It's checked in. Rev 27. > > Are you going to merge the changes into the trunk? > > We can tag and branch from that revision for ongoing DUnit1 fixes if needed. > > Mark > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Paul Spain [mailto:pv...@gm...] > Sent: Thursday, November 19, 2009 5:50 PM > To: Mark Edington (Embarcadero) > Subject: Fwd: [DUnit-interest] DUnit2 merge progress... > > Hi Mark, > > I'm ready to bring the DUnit2 code across to the DUnit repository. > Do you have time to commit the CodeGear changes to the public DUnit beforehand, or could I help out with that? > > Cheers, Paul. > > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: Paul Spain <pv...@gm...> > Date: Sat, Nov 7, 2009 at 3:27 PM > Subject: Re: [DUnit-interest] DUnit2 merge progress... > To: "Mark Edington (Embarcadero)" <med...@us...> > Cc: Users of the DUnit Xtreme testing framework for Delphi <dun...@li...> > > > Thanks Mark. I tried checking out against that URL yesterday a few times and it failed with a message stating the project address was known but there was some issue with the content. I assumed it was a template address for each SF project, that may not resolve for CVS-based repositories. In any case, its working now! > > We have a job in front of us adding our respective dunit mods to the repository. It may be easier if you go first, as adding the CodeGear mods against dunit would be simpler than patching the functionality to Peter M's re-written dunit2. > If you have any unit tests for the new functionality, would you please add them as well? > > Meanwhile, I'm creating a repository on SF dunit2 from Peter M's last version through to what we are using now in the tiOPFproject. > > Cheers, Paul. > > > On Sat, Nov 7, 2009 at 3:38 AM, Mark Edington (Embarcadero) <med...@us...> wrote: >> On 11/5/2009 10:34 PM, Paul Spain wrote: >>> >>> I think >>> it would ease future development if we moved to Subversion as >>> discussed in the earlier thread. >>> >> >> Jud already "moved" the main repository to Subversion back in April of >> 2008. >> >> The URL is on this page: >> >> https://sourceforge.net/projects/dunit/develop >> >> Mark >> > > CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This email message is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply email and destroy all copies of the original message. > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Let Crystal Reports handle the reporting - Free Crystal Reports 2008 30-Day trial. Simplify your report design, integration and deployment - and focus on what you do best, core application coding. Discover what's new with Crystal Reports now. http://p.sf.net/sfu/bobj-july _______________________________________________ Dunit-interest mailing list Dun...@li... https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dunit-interest -- Juanca -----La pièce jointe associée suit----- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Let Crystal Reports handle the reporting - Free Crystal Reports 2008 30-Day trial. Simplify your report design, integration and deployment - and focus on what you do best, core application coding. Discover what's new with Crystal Reports now. http://p.sf.net/sfu/bobj-july -----La pièce jointe associée suit----- _______________________________________________ Dunit-interest mailing list Dun...@li... https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dunit-interest |