Mailing-List: contact flex-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of omarg.developer@gmail.com
 designates 74.125.82.41 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <4F38CA66.7030908@leichtgewicht.at>
References: 
 <CAEFz_vtvX+8H7A9Kqsyfk2GfBwyuA-41fGVfVt6oqGwyuzLUOA@mail.gmail.com>
	<4F38CA66.7030908@leichtgewicht.at>
Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2012 01:39:36 -0800
Message-ID: 
 <CAEFz_vuEiLeXuPxy_RAGhK_V0hCMz+vfm7qS0iS4MDuv-QsR4w@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [DECISION] Unit Testing and Mocking Frameworks (was: [RT]
 Recommendation Unit-Test System?)
From: Omar Gonzalez <omarg.developer@gmail.com>
To: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=f46d044287beb08e0d04b8d54118

--f46d044287beb08e0d04b8d54118
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

On Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 12:31 AM, Martin Heidegger <mh@leichtgewicht.at>wrote:

> +1
>
> But we still have a practical problem: Even when FlexUnit is given to the
> Flex SDK: Mockolate and
> its dependencies are not. Those would be the first "external" libraries
> that Apache Flex would rely
> on. Flex can not be built without them.
>
> In my mind: Open source is open source: That means Apache can deploy other
> projects too, if those
> projects are under a compatible license: just publish the .swc with the
> rest of the code. Right?
>
> Now I wonder: For deployment would a Category B license be enough? MIT? Or
> is it necessary to be
> of Apache compatible (BSD).
>
> yours
> Martin.


Here is the list of compatible licenses:
http://www.apache.org/legal/3party.html#category-a

and what to do when a dependency has incompatible licenses.
http://www.apache.org/legal/3party.html#options

-omar

>
>
>
> On 13/02/2012 09:04, Omar Gonzalez wrote:
>
>> After the discussion we had around unit testing and mocking frameworks we
>> had two very generous offers from Michael Labriola (FlexUnit) and Drew
>> Bourne (Mockolate/hamcrest-as3).
>>
>> Michael is awaiting feedback from a mentor (Bertrand was on the thread) on
>> what the next steps would be to make a donation of the source code for
>> FlexUnit.
>>
>> Drew offered to help with any issues we may encounter with Mockolate or
>> hamcrest-as3 that would prevent us from using them as the libraries we use
>> to test the Flex SDK.
>>
>> In light of these two generous offers from the authors of these libraries
>> I
>> think that FlexUnit, Mockolate, and hamcrest-as3 should be the libraries
>> that we adopt as the testing libraries for the Flex SDK.
>>
>> My reasoning:
>>
>> - Multiple testing frameworks would be messy.
>> - Managing build files with multiple testing frameworks could get messy.
>> - Managing reports for unit tests from multiple testing frameworks could
>> get messy.
>> - Both authors for the frameworks have offered help or a donation to the
>> project, I think we should take it! :)
>> - FlexUnit is supported in Eclipse editors and IntelliJ
>> - Mockolate can also verify using reflection, eliminating the concern of
>> magic string usage
>>
>> Can we come to a consensus on these 3 libraries? This will allow people to
>> comfortably get working on writing unit tests for the SDK. Nobody wants to
>> refactor code unnecessarily, so I think we should decide on the libraries.
>>
>> What do you guys think?
>>
>> -omar
>>
>>
>

--f46d044287beb08e0d04b8d54118--