From: Tony
Subject: Unit Test Framework
Date: 
Message-ID: <43cc4499$1_8@news.peopletelecom.com.au>
Hi.

I would be grateful for any recommendations on a unit testing framework for 
Common Lisp.

I'm seeking something that isnt GPL or LGPL.

Thankyou.

Tony 

From: Eric Lavigne
Subject: Re: Unit Test Framework
Date: 
Message-ID: <1137461838.530695.4550@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>
>I would be grateful for any recommendations on a
>unit testing framework for Common Lisp.

This is the unit test framework that Erlisp uses. Unfortunately,
common-lisp.net is experiencing technical difficulties at the moment.
You may want to wait a few days and continue your search when things
are working again.

http://common-lisp.net/project/bese/FiveAM.html

> I'm seeking something that isnt GPL or LGPL.

I tend to avoid these also, but I'm curious why it is a big issue for
you in this case. I don't remember FiveAM's license, and it's difficult
to check because common-lisp.net is down.

========================================

I checked www.cl-user.net for unit testing libraries and found one
called HEUTE (in the libraries and tools section). It uses the LLGPL
license, which is in the same spirit as the LGPL. I have never used
this library.
From: Brian Downing
Subject: Re: Unit Test Framework
Date: 
Message-ID: <kn8zf.496022$084.470754@attbi_s22>
In article <······················@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>,
Eric Lavigne <············@gmail.com> wrote:
> >I would be grateful for any recommendations on a
> >unit testing framework for Common Lisp.
> 
> This is the unit test framework that Erlisp uses. Unfortunately,
> common-lisp.net is experiencing technical difficulties at the moment.
> You may want to wait a few days and continue your search when things
> are working again.
> 
> http://common-lisp.net/project/bese/FiveAM.html

I've also found fiveam to be powerful and succinct - I'd recommend it as
well.

> > I'm seeking something that isnt GPL or LGPL.
> 
> I tend to avoid these also, but I'm curious why it is a big issue for
> you in this case. I don't remember FiveAM's license, and it's difficult
> to check because common-lisp.net is down.

It's BSD licensed.

-bcd
-- 
*** Brian Downing <bdowning at lavos dot net> 
From: RPG
Subject: Re: Unit Test Framework
Date: 
Message-ID: <1137468243.118915.305830@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com>
Does this mean you want one that is commercial?
From: M Jared Finder
Subject: Re: Unit Test Framework
Date: 
Message-ID: <2eqdnW6E9PNj8FHenZ2dnUVZ_tWdnZ2d@speakeasy.net>
Tony wrote:
> Hi.
> 
> I would be grateful for any recommendations on a unit testing framework for 
> Common Lisp.
> 
> I'm seeking something that isnt GPL or LGPL.

GPL I can understand avoiding, but why are you avoiding the LGPL?  Are 
you planning on distributing a modified version of the unit testing 
framework?

   -- MJF
From: Pascal Bourguignon
Subject: Re: Unit Test Framework
Date: 
Message-ID: <87mzhvv15l.fsf@thalassa.informatimago.com>
M Jared Finder <·····@hpalace.com> writes:

> Tony wrote:
>> Hi.
>> I would be grateful for any recommendations on a unit testing
>> framework for Common Lisp.
>> I'm seeking something that isnt GPL or LGPL.
>
> GPL I can understand avoiding, but why are you avoiding the LGPL?  Are
> you planning on distributing a modified version of the unit testing
> framework?

If not,  GPL would as valid as anything else.  More actually than
commercial licenses!

-- 
__Pascal Bourguignon__                     http://www.informatimago.com/

What is this talk of 'release'? Klingons do not make software 'releases'.
Our software 'escapes' leaving a bloody trail of designers and quality
assurance people in it's wake.
From: Thomas F. Burdick
Subject: Re: Unit Test Framework
Date: 
Message-ID: <xcv7j8z2gsc.fsf@conquest.OCF.Berkeley.EDU>
"Tony" <······@nowhere.com> writes:

> Hi.
> 
> I would be grateful for any recommendations on a unit testing framework for 
> Common Lisp.
> 
> I'm seeking something that isnt GPL or LGPL.

I use RT, which is a very simple testing framework under an MIT
license.  If you use sbcl, you can (require :sb-rt), otherwise check
out www.cliki.net/RT

-- 
           /|_     .-----------------------.                        
         ,'  .\  / | Free Mumia Abu-Jamal! |
     ,--'    _,'   | Abolish the racist    |
    /       /      | death penalty!        |
   (   -.  |       `-----------------------'
   |     ) |                               
  (`-.  '--.)                              
   `. )----'                               
From: Larry Clapp
Subject: Re: Unit Test Framework
Date: 
Message-ID: <slrndspu5d.hr7.larry@theclapp.ddts.net>
On 2006-01-17, Tony <······@nowhere.com> wrote:
> I would be grateful for any recommendations on a unit testing
> framework for Common Lisp.
>
> I'm seeking something that isnt GPL or LGPL.

I like xlunit (http://www.cliki.net/xlunit).  It's Lispy and close to
JUnit, with which I have more familiarity.

The license is, I believe, BSD:

> Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or without
> modification, are permitted provided that the following conditions
> are met:
> 1. Redistributions of source code must retain the above copyright
>    notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer.
> 2. Redistributions in binary form must reproduce the above copyright
>    notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer in
>    the documentation and/or other materials provided with the
>    distribution.
> 3. Neither the name of the author nor the names of the contributors
>    may be used to endorse or promote products derived from this
>    software without specific prior written permission.
[Disclaimer elided]

Though I don't understand why you care about the license of your test
suite.  Do you plan to release it?

-- Larry