Summarizing a long discussion: > > ABSTRACT: > > The Test Anything Protocol (TAP) is a simple text-based protocol > that allows communication between test scripts and a test harness. > > [HUGE CUT] > Hello all, and especially hello Robert (yes, I'm shamelessly asking for your partecipation here ;-) Please read on ...)
At this point, it seems that the consensus of the active community is "please try out Subunit, and if that does fail, fall back to TAP". Now, it should be clear I'm not a huge fan of SubUnit *over TAP*, but since: - TAP output should be easily convertible to SubUnit output (huge advantage for TAP fans like me), and: - there are SubUnit producers for many "important" languages, i.e. C++, C, shell, perl and python, I'm (grudgingly-ish) prepared to bow in front of the community's opinion. Still, as I said in an earlier mail, I don't really feel confident and/or comfortable working with SubUnit protocol at this point, due to its suboptimal documentation. So I'm going to ask: Robert, as the main proposer/supporter of the SubUnit protocol here, would you be willing and ready to help me out during my prospective work with GSoC, if I update my application's goal to read "Support SubUnit (and also TAP as derivation) in Automake-generated testsuites"? Maybe we could also improve SubUnit's documentation along the way, which would help both me and Automake, and also improve SubUnit itself and make it more "palatable" for potential adopters. Thanks, Stefano