I think this is one for the legal discuss list. This has been discussed before and I think the conclusion was that because you code to the cxxtest apis to write your test code it could be considered a derivative work.
Cheers, On 23/10/2007, Simon Nash <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I think it's fine to distribute unit test source and tell people what > tool they need to build and run the tests. And I agree that having a > list of suitable unit test tools on the Web site is helpful. > > Simon > > Adriano Crestani wrote: > > > 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: [email protected] > >>>>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: [email protected] > >>>>>>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: [email protected] > >>>>>>>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] > > -- Pete --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
