On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 8:39 AM, Stefano Lattarini <stefano.lattar...@gmail.com> wrote: > I don't know how the GSoC proposals are evaluated, but if reviewers tend > to prefer more precise goals, extending the proposal in this way might > not be a smart move. Maybe something like the following would be better? > > ``Interfacing with the Test Anything Protocol (TAP). If possible, try > to write an implementation that will allow future extensions to > similar but more advanced advanced protocols (e.g., subunit, which > is similar to TAP but slightly more structured, capable of handling > binary attachments, and so on).''
You could - or you could just write to the most capable and let folk insert a filter (e.g. tap2subunit, included in the subunit package) if they are using a different protocol themselves. There are a whole bunch of such protocols with varying capabilities around - tap, subunit, junit's xml format, glib's xml format, at least one json based format... -Rob
