Re: [boost] [test] boost.test owner unresponsive to persistent problems for multiple years

Subject: Re: [boost] [test] boost.test owner unresponsive to persistent problems for multiple years
From: Rob Stewart (rob.stewart_at_[hidden])
Date: 2015-01-21 19:34:59

On January 21, 2015 5:26:56 PM EST, legalize+jeeves_at_[hidden] wrote:
> =?windows-1252?Q?Bj=F8rn_Roald?= <bjorn_at_[hidden]> spake the secret
> code
> <54B0E109.8060307_at_[hidden]> thusly:
> 
> All I'm saying is that gtest is gaining acceptance because it supports
> its community of users in a reasonable way.  Boost.Test is losing
> ground and has been losing ground for 5+ years.

That's a valid point.

> That is exactly the sort of attitude that results in the really great
> book "Modern C++ Programming with Test-Driven Development" by Jeff
> Langr <http://amzn.to/15bvh9C> relegating Boost.Test to a bare mention
> in an appendix and using gtest throughout the book for all the
> examples.
> 
> Boost.Test is not leading mindshare.

That is unfortunate, but Boost.Test was, if I'm not much mistaken, originally for use by Boost libraries. That it has a wider user base is nice, but wasn't part of the original intent.

> >Thanks for your effort by the way Richard!  I do however think you 
> >should moderate your tone, hidden or literate, in some of your
> postings 
> >given the maintainer seems to be responding now and have 
> >co-maintainers/helpers.
> 
> The time for laughing with puppy dogs and picking daisies in a sunny
> verdant field is long gone.
> 
> After waiting 5 years for the simple issue cited in this thread to be
> resolved I'm told that I have to keep waiting and to be patient.  5
> years is long enough for anyone to wait.  My patience has long since
> been exhausted.

Your patience may be exhausted, but attacks are not helpful and aren't appropriate for the Boost community. If you can't restrain yourself, it would be better if you don't post until you can.

___
Rob

(Sent from my portable computation engine)