#3 Patch for #1182659 (Remove dependence on mmmockobjects)

open
nobody
None
5
2005-04-18
2005-04-18
Remko Popma
No

apply this patch as follows:
1. navigate to directory "src/jester"
(the parent of the "test" directory)
2. execute "patch -p0 < patch_remove_mock.txt"

Changes:
* Removed MockMutationMaker.java
* Removed MockMutationsList.java
* Modified AllTests.java
* Modified ClassTestTesterTest.java
* Modified MutationsListTest.java
* Renamed MutationsListTest.java RealMutationsListTest.java
* Added MockInterceptor.java

Discussion

  • Remko Popma

    Remko Popma - 2005-04-18

    Patch for #1182659 (Remove dependence on mmmockobjects)

     
  • Elliotte Rusty Harold

    Logged In: YES
    user_id=226817

    Is this patch merely inspired by SEASAR or does it actually
    use code from SEASAR?

     
  • Remko Popma

    Remko Popma - 2005-04-20

    Same as original patch, but fixes issues in MockInterceptor

     
  • Remko Popma

    Remko Popma - 2005-04-20

    Logged In: YES
    user_id=544920

    MockInterceptor.java does not use any code of Seasar. The
    original
    org.seasar.framework.aop.interceptors.MockInterceptor is
    implemented with AOP, where my version uses
    java.lang.reflect.Proxy.

    I don't think there are any license issues.
    I do want to keep the right to use this class in other
    projects though, both open source and closed source. Let me
    know if that is a problem.

    I found some issues in MockInterceptor with methods
    returning primitives. These issues are fixed in the second
    patch.
    Installation is as before:
    1. navigate to directory "src/jester"
    (the parent of the "test" directory)
    2. execute "patch -p0 < patch_remove_mock2.txt"

     
  • Elliotte Rusty Harold

    Logged In: YES
    user_id=226817

    Cool. I'll apply this in the near future.

    We don't have any formal process here for assigning
    copyright, so the situation is that you grant a license to
    whoever wants to use this code you've submitted under the
    usual Jester license (MIT license). However, what you wrote
    is still your property (unless you choose to sell or grant
    it to somebody else); and therefore you are free to use it
    in any way you feel. For instance, you can grant a different
    license to somebody else, or incorporate it in a closed
    source product.

    Because the MIT license pretty much grants these rights to
    everyone this is sort of an academic discussion. If the
    license were more restrictive, e.g. GPL, then this would
    have a lot more practical impact.

     

Log in to post a comment.

Get latest updates about Open Source Projects, Conferences and News.

Sign up for the SourceForge newsletter:





No, thanks