[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: RFC: GDL2 differences to EOF / WO4.5.1

From: Giulio Cesare Solaroli
Subject: Re: RFC: GDL2 differences to EOF / WO4.5.1
Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2003 10:26:59 +0100

On Thursday, Mar 27, 2003, at 09:43 Europe/Rome, David Ayers wrote:

Giulio Cesare Solaroli wrote:

On Wednesday, Mar 26, 2003, at 22:53 Europe/Rome, Stéphane Corthésy wrote:

GDL2 won't have enough test cases, despite David's efforts, so if we can get some more tests using OCUnit, that would benefit all.

Yes, this is absolutly correct. Right now the test cases merely cover single classes and thier API and currently only include some EOControl classes (Well also some adaptor and EOModel tests, but they need to be revisited). Also a lot of the tests are currently still "out of context". This should change over time, but for a more exhaustive testing, additional testing frameworks such as yours can only help us.

If I remember correctly, the only issue with OCUnit based code is that, despite of that fact that it is based on free (as in speech) software, it is not a GNU package, and that was why base our testing on guile eventhough it is sometimes rather akward to handle.

I think it would be great if you would contribute your extensions to the FSF and you could maintain it in the GNUstep repository though (if I interpreted you correctly).

I have no problem at all to contribute the code to FSF, but there are some issues that must be resolved: - our frameworks use some of the Omni frameworks; before committing everything to the FSF this dependency must be removed; this should not be a huge problem, but must be investigated; - some code snips have been taken from mailing-list messages; I have asked the original authors an informal permission when we did the first submission to SourceForge, but I think an further check should be done before giving the copyright to FSF (all the authors are cited in the source files); - we subclass OCUnit classes so Sente too must contribute its code to FSF for complete integration.

This should be all that's needed.

By the way, inside our frameworks there is also a prototype for a Log4OC implementation; Mirko Viviani has done it upon our request. It's still a prototype, but I think somebody could be interested in it too. If Mirko agrees, this would be readily available for inclusion in the GNUStep project as it only rely on libxml.

Giulio Cesare

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]