Re: [NMock2-Dev] NMock2 Reloaded

[Steve F. <st...@m3...>]

Hooray.

As a first cut, can I suggest you take a look at what we've been  
doing with jMock? Not all of it will be relevant but we have learned  
some lessons.

My feeling is that "supported by" is fine  -- as long as it actually  
is. A certain Agile consultancy has been a bit feeble in keeping the  
project alive.

S.

On 14 Jan 2008, at 19:41, Thomas Weingartner wrote:

> Yes it is true that I'm going to continue NMock2.
>
> I had some EMails with Nick Hines from the NMock2 project and I didn't
> realize that the NMock project is using NMock2 as a moniker. There was
> no commit activity on the CVS of NMock for the last 7 month. Even  
> worse
> is that there was no update of the documentation and the web site. On
> NMock.org is still a release candidate available; no releases. So we
> thought the project is dead.
>
> We used NMock2 in our last project and we will use it on more  
> projects.
>
> The main goals we have are
> - Maintaining documentation, releases and the forums
> - Document and cleaning the code
> - Incorporating of new ideas (e.g. get rid of strings, mocking classes
> etc.)
>
>
> We really want to continue NMock2 code and really want to combine
> efforts on NMock and NMock2.
>
> Just to make our standpoint clear: The company where I work will  
> support
> the NMock2 project. I'm the project leader and I have two developers
> that will help me maintaining everything. We will get some official
> daily time to develop for NMock2. On the other hand the company  
> want to
> see something like "supported by xyz" with their logo and a link to  
> the
> web site.
>
> Kind Regards
> Thomas


Steve Freeman
Winner of the Agile Alliance Gordon Pask award 2006

http://www.m3p.co.uk

M3P Limited.
Registered office. 2 Church Street, Burnham, Bucks, SL1 7HZ.
Company registered in England & Wales. Number 03689627