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 changesSome 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! :-) RoadmapTake part in the discussion in the forum.
|
|
mkempka.de)