home
download
howto
screenshots
roadmap
FAQ

Project Home
Bugs
Forums

Impressum

Future plans

Below are my plans for the future of Coverlipse. I make them up from my own imagination and the feedback I get. They are plans, not destiny. Use the poll to tell me about your priorities, that may change mine.

Plan changes

Some users will joyfully read, some won't: My plans for Coverlipse have changed. I don't see it any more as special test tool, but more as a general purpose development tool. Here is why and how: The classloader independent mode will be implemented as project nature. Classes from projects that have a coverlipse nature, will be monitored, all others won't. Regardless of the launch target. No special launch targets or filters are needed. (Of course, the current use case with special launch targets will still work.)

Because all the bytecode modifying needed is already implemented, Coverlipse will be able to also monitor method execution times. So, there will be a primitive profiling view.

As a consequence, I neither have the time nor the motivation to implement the Branch Coverage nor to rework the All Uses Coverage in the near future. So, the many users voting for Branch Coverage may be disappointed. However, the many different voters for classloader and launch target independent modes will love that, and I am one of them. It's great to develop ones own software! :-)

Roadmap

Take part in the discussion in the forum.


  • Next version will contain a subset of the following properties:

  • Future features in planned order (follow the links for details)
    • human readable reports (PDF?) (0% completed)
    • Coverlipse testing Perspective (0% completed)
    • Improve package filters (0% completed)
    • support for JUnit Plug-In Tests (0% completed)
  • New product branch: Coverlipse CI (0% completed)
    • standalone version for continuous integration and command line usage
    • rework all-uses coverage (50% completed)
    • Branch Coverage (defines Version 1.0) (5% completed)
Advanced Poll
Why does Coverlipse suck?
I can’t figure out how to do what I need!
My feature is missing!
It is unnecessarily frustrating and complex!
It crashes all the time!
It’s simply ugly!
I don't understand it's results!
I’m thinking about the tool, instead of my work!
It doesn't react how I expect it to1
What? It doesn't suck at all!
It's so damned slow, basic operations take forever!


View results
Version 2.03

Advanced Poll
Which of the planned features has highest priority to you? (see roadmap for details)
Branch Coverage
human readable reports (PDF?)
Improved usability of the Class View
Coverlipse testing Perspective
support for JUnit Plug-In Tests
standalone version of Coverlipse
improve package in-/exclude filters
other (please comment on next page)
Classloader independent mode
TestNG support


View results
Version 2.03
Last updated 2006-07-01 11:27:06 by Matthias Kempka (coverlipse at mkempka.de)