That's too bad that you had to stop using it.

I've never used one of these tools, but I knew they existed. Just today I was discussing "testing the tests" with a coworker. In my opinion, where I work we write lots of incomplete/illogical tests, sometimes bordering on cargo culting. Aside from code-coverage, which is flawed, we have no real measure of whether the tests we write are effective or not.

There is a tool to detect duplicate tests which many have found useful: http://ortask.com/testless/

For other kinds of test quality, try Mutator: http://ortask.com/mutator/

Thanks for the links!

I hate to sound negative, but something about that website seems dodgy. I'm unconvinced duplicate/overlapping tests -- while obviously undesirable -- have a direct correlation with code quality. Unfortunately, in order to read their "papers" where they elaborate on this, I have to register :/

I'd rather use something open source like pitest.

(Again, thanks for the links! I don't want to sound too negative)

Did you try using the history file option?

For every check in we get generate a new build environment, so managing a history file would have been quite difficult.

What about checking the history file into its own rep? Clone it as part of the build-environment setup, and commit/push after validation. You can even use this across a group of people and share each other's mutations.

Or even simpler, why not have build actions copy it to/from a specific location outside the build target dir? You could even make it a shared network drive, if you didn't care about the possibility of losing someone's changes if two people run tests at the same time.