Doing the "right" thing

I was suitably impressed that Dan provided feedback to my previous post re the patent around the Object Test Bench v’s BlueJ issue in which he covers the two points I was trying to make:

  1. The patent shouldn’t have happened – congrats to the team for admitting that they are only human and that mistakes do happen.  Along with the BlueJ community (which I don’t actually belong as I think this is flogging a dead horse) I’m interested to see the answer to “why did this happen in the first place”.  I think they would also like to see some attribution of the work that was done in this area prior to VS2005.

  2. The second point was that OTB has limited use – why do I say this and what features would I ask for? I appreciate that Microsoft is always listening to the community (for which I’m very impressed) but these two bits of feedback were either ignored or sidelined as not important:

  • OTB only works with the project that is marked as startup – and this includes class libraries.  If you are working on a class library (as part of an application) and you want to try something with a class you have to set that project to be the startup, experiment with the class, then set the application back to being the startup project

  • OTB has no memory – you can establish quite complex object graphs only to have them blown away when you rebuild/make changes to your application.

I’m sure there are other bits of feedback that I would provide on the OTB but these are the two sore points from my point of view.  Thanks again Dan for opening the discussion on the future of the OTB

Leave a comment