<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<TITLE>Message</TITLE>
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2800.1597" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN class=951332119-19052008>Hi
Maik and David,</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN
class=951332119-19052008></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN class=951332119-19052008>Indeed
a great idea -- I would be very much interested into it, in particularly into
junit xml output due to being "Ant-focused".</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN
class=951332119-19052008></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN class=951332119-19052008>Note
that we are currently implementing our C++ unit tests with cppunit, and are then
wrapping each cppunit test case into a ctest call for the sake of
security in our Ant-based CI on the buildserver.</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN
class=951332119-19052008></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN class=951332119-19052008>This
is another reason why I prefer junit xml output, because it is easy (or maybe
more correct: here I know how easy it is) to merge several independent junit xml
reports (cf. CI and isolation and wrapping each cppunit test case into a ctest
call).</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN
class=951332119-19052008></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN
class=951332119-19052008>Regards,</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN
class=951332119-19052008> Reinhold</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV class=OutlookMessageHeader lang=en-us dir=ltr align=left><FONT
face=Tahoma size=2>-----Original Message-----<BR><B>From:</B>
cmake-bounces@cmake.org [mailto:cmake-bounces@cmake.org] <B>On Behalf Of
</B>David Cole<BR><B>Sent:</B> Monday, May 19, 2008 1:02 PM<BR><B>To:</B> Maik
Beckmann<BR><B>Cc:</B> cmake@cmake.org<BR><B>Subject:</B> Re: [CMake] [ctest]
junit xml output<BR><BR></FONT></DIV>That's a great idea! Are cppunit and
nunit output formats similar enough to junit that they could all be done at
once...?<BR><BR>Feel free to submit a patch implementing this as a feature
request in the bug tracker... or to create a CMake Wiki page with details on
what output format would be useful for this feature.<BR><BR>How many others
out there reading this list would be interested?<BR><BR><BR><BR>
<DIV class=gmail_quote>On Mon, May 19, 2008 at 7:22 AM, Maik Beckmann <<A
href="mailto:beckmann.maik@googlemail.com">beckmann.maik@googlemail.com</A>>
wrote:<BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE class=gmail_quote
style="PADDING-LEFT: 1ex; MARGIN: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; BORDER-LEFT: rgb(204,204,204) 1px solid">Hi,<BR><BR>I
thinking about working on ant's junit xml format as a secondary
output<BR>format of ctest. This way it would be much more convenient
to integrate<BR>ctest results into one of the java centric/compatible
dashboards.<BR><BR>The idea came to my mind when considering hudson<BR>(<A
href="https://hudson.dev.java.net/"
target=_blank>https://hudson.dev.java.net/</A>) as a lightweight continuous
integration system<BR>for one-person usage.<BR><BR>An option may be
distributing a ctest_to_junit.xsl file, but teaching it to<BR>ctest makes it
much more easy to use.<BR><BR>What do you people think?<BR><BR><BR>--
Maik<BR>_______________________________________________<BR>CMake mailing
list<BR><A href="mailto:CMake@cmake.org">CMake@cmake.org</A><BR><A
href="http://www.cmake.org/mailman/listinfo/cmake"
target=_blank>http://www.cmake.org/mailman/listinfo/cmake</A><BR></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV><BR></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>