Hi Simon, Yes, you are right, I forgot this option, there is no problem to distribute the unit test source code :P. But anyway, the list contained on the web site I could be helpful :)
Regards, Adriano Crestani On 10/22/07, Simon Nash <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Why does the test tool need to be distributed with a Tuscany release? > If the build depends on having the tool available, then I can see some > justification for this, but even then it would be possible for people > who build the source to download the tool separately. > > Simon > > Adriano Crestani wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > Brady suggested to use CxxTest only on development process and don't > > distribute it with the released source. However, whoever wants to modify > the > > code from a release would want to test it, to check if the modifications > > does not compromise the software. So, I suggest to look for another text > > unit tool that could be distributed with the released source. I really > dont > > know any other, but searching on web I found a list of open source C/C++ > > unit test tools on [1]. > > > > [1] http://www.opensourcetesting.org/unit_c.php > > > > Regards, > > Adriano Crestani > > > > On 8/10/07, Brady Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > >> > >>Good idea, I always prefer to see plenty of documentation. I updated the > >>wiki with a documentation feature. > >> > >>http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/TUSCANYWIKI/SCA+Native+Next+R > >>elease+Contents > >> > >>What sort of help do you think I'll have with these features? > >> > >>-------------------- > >>Brady Johnson > >>Lead Software Developer - HydraSCA > >>Rogue Wave Software - [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> > >> > >>-----Original Message----- > >>From: haleh mahbod [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>Sent: Friday, August 10, 2007 3:36 PM > >>To: tuscany-dev@ws.apache.org > >>Subject: Re: [SCA Native] next release content [was: Tuscany roadmap] > >> > >>How about enhancing the documentation (architecture, get started and > >>user > >>doc) to help new people come on board faster? > >> > >>Another thought might be to have an integration story between Native and > >>Java. Some of this work started for OSCon, for example a sample of a > >>composite which include C++ and Java components. > >> > >> > >>On 7/26/07, Pete Robbins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> > >>>That looks good. I think there is more than enough in that list to > >>>justify a release. My priorities would be: > >>>1) upgrade to the sca 1.0 spec levels (assembly and cpp). > >>>2) build system move to ant > >>>(enough there for a release) > >>> > >>>We should discuss your ideas for the rearchitecture of the data model. > >>>It sounds like a good idea so maybe we can flesh out a proposal for > >>>that. > >>> > >>>Cheers, > >>> > >>>On 26/07/07, Brady Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>> > >>>> > >>>>Hello all, > >>>> > >>>>I created a wiki page detailing the TuscanySCA Native Next Release > >>>>Contents, which will probably be called M4. > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/TUSCANYWIKI/SCA+Native+Ne > >>>>xt+R > >>>>elease+Contents > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>Can I get some feedback on the items listed there. Also, what's the > >>>>Apache procedure to start planning and implementing the changes? > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>-------------------- > >>>>Brady Johnson > >>>>Lead Software Developer - HydraSCA > >>>>Rogue Wave Software - [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>-----Original Message----- > >>>>From: Pete Robbins [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>>>Sent: Thursday, July 12, 2007 11:00 AM > >>>>To: tuscany-dev@ws.apache.org > >>>>Subject: Re: [SCA Native] next release content [was: Tuscany > >>>>roadmap] > >>>> > >>>>On 12/07/07, Brady Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>>> > >>>>>I forgot to mention another one in my previous post: > >>>>>- get the test suite up to date and working. I don't like making > >>>>>changes to code without running a good unit/basic test suite. > >>>> > >>>>We do not have ANY test suite. I run through the samples to test > >>>>changes. The code under tuscany/cpp/sca/test is not maintained and > >>>>should probably be discarded. I think we need to build up a unit > >>>>test suite and would welcome suggestions on how to start this (use > >>>>cppunit?) > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>>I can start a separate thread for the ant vs make discussion. > >>>>>Basically, I think it would be easier to simplify the build > >>>>>process using make. I've looked through some of the makefiles and > >>>>>they're horrendous. :) > >>>> > >>>>Let's discuss it here then. We need to be able to build from source > >>>>on windows, linux and Mac. On Windows we settled on MSVC 8 so it can > >> > >>>>build with the free studio express. For linux we settled on automake > >> > >>>>as it seemed to be fairly standard for C/C++ open source projects. > >>>>In doing this I had to learn automake and learnt to hate it ;-) ... > >> > >>>>and as you say some of the makefiles are ugly. If you believe an ant > >> > >>>>based build would be better then I'll happily go along with that. > >>>>Perhaps you could start this off by showing us what the build would > >>>>look like for, say, cpp/sca/runtime/core ?? > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>>-------------------- > >>>>>Brady Johnson > >>>>>Lead Software Developer - HydraSCA Rogue Wave Software - > >>>>>[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>>-----Original Message----- > >>>>>From: Pete Robbins [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>>>>Sent: Thursday, July 12, 2007 9:53 AM > >>>>>To: tuscany-dev@ws.apache.org > >>>>>Subject: [SCA Native] next release content [was: Tuscany roadmap] > >>>>> > >>>>>We should definitely start planning some content for the next SCA > >>>>>Native release. > >>>>> > >>>>>On 12/07/07, Brady Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>>>Is there some sort of TuscanySCA roadmap? I've looked around a > >>>>>>bit and > >>>>> > >>>>>>haven't found one. I was curious what the future plans for > >>>>>>TuscanySCA CPP were in particular. I have a few ideas and I was > >>>>>>curious if they had been contemplated yet. > >>>>>> > >>>>>>- Move from Assembly Model 0.96 to 1.0 > >>>>> > >>>>>Definitely. We also need to move the CPP extension to the 1.0 C++ > >>>>>C&I spec version > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>>>- Move to ant instead of make > >>>>> > >>>>>I need to understand this proposal a little better. Can you > >> > >>elaborate? > >> > >>>>>Probably worth starting a separate thread to discuss this. I'm all > >> > >>>>>for > >>>> > >>>>>simplifying the build though! > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>>>- Remove runtime dependancy on model data structure (slight > >>>>>>changes to > >>>>> > >>>>>>data/model shouldnt affect runtime usage) > >>>>> > >>>>>ok > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>>>- Support additional WSDL bindings: RPC, DOC encoded... > >>>>> > >>>>>sounds good. > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>>>-------------------- > >>>>>>Brady Johnson > >>>>>>Lead Software Developer - HydraSCA Rogue Wave Software - > >>>>>>[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>>Cheers, > >>>>> > >>>>>-- > >>>>>Pete > >>>>> > >>>>>------------------------------------------------------------------ > >>>>>--- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>>>>For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>>------------------------------------------------------------------ > >>>>>--- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>>>>For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>-- > >>>>Pete > >>>> > >>>>-------------------------------------------------------------------- > >>>>- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>>>For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>-------------------------------------------------------------------- > >>>>- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>>>For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>>> > >>>> > >>> > >>> > >>>-- > >>>Pete > >>> > >>>--------------------------------------------------------------------- > >>>To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>>For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>> > >>> > >> > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >
