This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the Mauve project.
Re: [Kissme-general] Re: Should I or not submit changes?
- From: Brian Jones <cbj at gnu dot org>
- To: Dalibor Topic <robilad at yahoo dot com>
- Cc: Stephen Crawley <crawley at dstc dot edu dot au>, John Leuner <jewel at pixie dot co dot za>, Alex Lau <alex at dentonlive dot com>, kissme-general at lists dot sourceforge dot net, Mark Wielaard <mark at klomp dot org>, mauve-discuss at sources dot redhat dot com
- Date: 18 Jul 2002 09:34:21 -0400
- Subject: Re: [Kissme-general] Re: Should I or not submit changes?
- References: <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Dalibor Topic <email@example.com> writes:
> Porting tests over to Junit might not be too exciting,
> though. I believe that (if the mauve hackers decide to
> allow junit tests) it would be a better option to have
> both frameworks in parallel for a while. As junit
> relies on reflection, it wouldn't make much sense to
> run it on an implementation with broken reflection
> libraries. ;)
Yes, it would be easier if for a time it were possible to run against
both the old tests and the new tests. When I looked at junit last it
was to see what the base requirement for the JVM would be and I
thought reflection would be required but after reading the docs I had
the impression you could potentially get around not having reflection
by specifying the necessary information in a file instead. No time to
dig this up right now though.
> The major point junit has for it, in my opinion, is
> the amount of documentation surrounding it: books,
> tutorials etc. It seems to be easy to find answers.
> That could lower the entry barrier for fresh mauve
Yes, I think that would be the win-win scenario.
Brian Jones <firstname.lastname@example.org>