Richard-185 wrote
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.
How often do you see anyone out there making a library that duplicates the functionality of a boost library? I haven't seen it happen very often and at the moment, the only example I can think of is Boost.Test. There are MULTIPLE test frameworks out there that are gaining users at the expense of Boost.Test.
FYI - I know you can find a few C++ serialization libraries which claim to have some advantages over boost serialization. But I'm wondering if there isn't a larger issue here. Boost has implicitly required that a new library submission not address some functionality already in boost. But there have been a few exceptions: state machine and mdm geometry and polygon. Maybe we should be more open to accepting libraries which might compete with existing ones? -- View this message in context: http://boost.2283326.n4.nabble.com/test-boost-test-owner-unresponsive-to-per... Sent from the Boost - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.