> I would like to add that a little *proactive* communication from the > maintainers could have prevented this. A simple announcement to the dev > list that a 1.5 is in the works would have been enough to keep people happy > for a good while. Keeping tracker items up-to-date would definitely help. > The project has some "broken windows" that make it appear dormant. Fixing > them is essential if this it to remain a successful project, true to its > original focus -- and to prevent misunderstandings like this one.
My sense is that what folks consider to be issues and problems with UnitTest++ have to do with their own particular goals and desires that are not necessarily widely required. As a contrast to "broken windows," the several companies at which I've downloaded and used UT++, I've been able to use UnitTest++ nearly stock. I've added support for local platforms (changes for which cannot be folded back into the open distribution due to NDA) and I've added a mechanism to disable particular tests at compile time, and frankly the modifications were so minimal that it seemed unnecessary to even consider demanding their inclusion in the source distribution. IMHO. -tom! ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ The Planet: dedicated and managed hosting, cloud storage, colocation Stay online with enterprise data centers and the best network in the business Choose flexible plans and management services without long-term contracts Personal 24x7 support from experience hosting pros just a phone call away. http://p.sf.net/sfu/theplanet-com _______________________________________________ unittest-cpp-devel mailing list unittest-cpp-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/unittest-cpp-devel
