* Stefano Lattarini wrote on Sun, Mar 20, 2011 at 11:40:39AM CET: > On Sunday 20 March 2011, Robert Collins wrote: > > On Sun, Mar 20, 2011 at 8:53 PM, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: > > > Are TAP and subunit compatible on their common subset? If not, why not? > > > > You can convert TAP to subunit, and you can convert the things TAP can > > represent from subunit to TAP. subunit's core is more structured than > > TAP, so the two protocols don't pun as each other at all. > > > If I'm not misreading the class TAP2SubUnit in python/subunit/__init__.py, > converting from TAP into subunit shouldn't be much difficult, even with > just the POSIX tools available. This means that we could add support for > TAP "today", and if "tomorrow" we decide (or our users tell us) to start > supporting also SubUnit, we could add a SubUnit parser, and then continue > to support also TAP by writing a TAP->SubUnit converter and filtering TAP > output into it -- which would allow us to drop the TAP parser (less code > to maintain) without losing backward-compatibility.
Or add a subunit parser and a quick tap2subunit perl module today and have the best of both worlds? (This is meant as an honest question, even if it looks like a rhetoric one.) Thanks, Ralf
