Merge branch 'master' into josh/fix_scoped_class2

6 files changed, 106 insertions, 256 deletions

diff --git a/googlemock/docs/CheatSheet.md b/googlemock/docs/CheatSheet.md
index c6367fdd..d54dd16a 100644
--- a/googlemock/docs/CheatSheet.md
+++ b/googlemock/docs/CheatSheet.md
@@ -178,6 +178,8 @@ divided into several categories:
 |`Ne(value)`           |`argument != value`|
 |`IsNull()`            |`argument` is a `NULL` pointer (raw or smart).|
 |`NotNull()`           |`argument` is a non-null pointer (raw or smart).|
+|`VariantWith<T>(m)`   |`argument` is `variant<>` that holds the alternative of
+type T with a value matching `m`.|
 |`Ref(variable)`       |`argument` is a reference to `variable`.|
 |`TypedEq<type>(value)`|`argument` has type `type` and is equal to `value`. You may need to use this instead of `Eq(value)` when the mock function is overloaded.|
 
@@ -227,7 +229,7 @@ The `argument` can be either a C string or a C++ string object:
 
 `ContainsRegex()` and `MatchesRegex()` use the regular expression
 syntax defined
-[here](../../googletest/docs/AdvancedGuide.md#regular-expression-syntax).
+[here](../../googletest/docs/advanced.md#regular-expression-syntax).
 `StrCaseEq()`, `StrCaseNe()`, `StrEq()`, and `StrNe()` work for wide
 strings as well.
 
@@ -347,7 +349,7 @@ You can make a matcher from one or more other matchers:
 
 ## Matchers as Test Assertions ##
 
-|`ASSERT_THAT(expression, m)`|Generates a [fatal failure](../../googletest/docs/Primer.md#assertions) if the value of `expression` doesn't match matcher `m`.|
+|`ASSERT_THAT(expression, m)`|Generates a [fatal failure](../../googletest/docs/primer.md#assertions) if the value of `expression` doesn't match matcher `m`.|
 |:---------------------------|:----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
 |`EXPECT_THAT(expression, m)`|Generates a non-fatal failure if the value of `expression` doesn't match matcher `m`.                                                          |
 
diff --git a/googlemock/docs/CookBook.md b/googlemock/docs/CookBook.md
index 3d07e68b..8809b0e7 100644
--- a/googlemock/docs/CookBook.md
+++ b/googlemock/docs/CookBook.md
@@ -1231,7 +1231,7 @@ that references the implementation object dies, the implementation
 object will be deleted.
 
 Therefore, if you have some complex matcher that you want to use again
-and again, there is no need to build it everytime. Just assign it to a
+and again, there is no need to build it every time. Just assign it to a
 matcher variable and use that variable repeatedly! For example,
 
 ```
@@ -1403,7 +1403,7 @@ edge from node A to node B wherever A must occur before B, we can get
 a DAG. We use the term "sequence" to mean a directed path in this
 DAG. Now, if we decompose the DAG into sequences, we just need to know
 which sequences each `EXPECT_CALL()` belongs to in order to be able to
-reconstruct the orginal DAG.
+reconstruct the original DAG.
 
 So, to specify the partial order on the expectations we need to do two
 things: first to define some `Sequence` objects, and then for each
@@ -2182,7 +2182,7 @@ the implementation object dies, the implementation object will be
 deleted.
 
 If you have some complex action that you want to use again and again,
-you may not have to build it from scratch everytime. If the action
+you may not have to build it from scratch every time. If the action
 doesn't have an internal state (i.e. if it always does the same thing
 no matter how many times it has been called), you can assign it to an
 action variable and use that variable repeatedly. For example:
@@ -2229,77 +2229,71 @@ versus
 
 ## Mocking Methods That Use Move-Only Types ##
 
-C++11 introduced <em>move-only types</em>.  A move-only-typed value can be moved from one object to another, but cannot be copied.  `std::unique_ptr<T>` is probably the most commonly used move-only type.
+C++11 introduced *move-only types*. A move-only-typed value can be moved from
+one object to another, but cannot be copied. `std::unique_ptr<T>` is
+probably the most commonly used move-only type.
 
-Mocking a method that takes and/or returns move-only types presents some challenges, but nothing insurmountable.  This recipe shows you how you can do it.
+Mocking a method that takes and/or returns move-only types presents some
+challenges, but nothing insurmountable. This recipe shows you how you can do it.
+Note that the support for move-only method arguments was only introduced to
+gMock in April 2017; in older code, you may find more complex
+[workarounds](#LegacyMoveOnly) for lack of this feature.
 
-Let’s say we are working on a fictional project that lets one post and share snippets called “buzzes”.  Your code uses these types:
+Let’s say we are working on a fictional project that lets one post and share
+snippets called “buzzes”. Your code uses these types:
 
-```
+```cpp
 enum class AccessLevel { kInternal, kPublic };
 
 class Buzz {
  public:
-  explicit Buzz(AccessLevel access) { … }
+  explicit Buzz(AccessLevel access) { ... }
   ...
 };
 
 class Buzzer {
  public:
   virtual ~Buzzer() {}
-  virtual std::unique_ptr<Buzz> MakeBuzz(const std::string& text) = 0;
-  virtual bool ShareBuzz(std::unique_ptr<Buzz> buzz, Time timestamp) = 0;
+  virtual std::unique_ptr<Buzz> MakeBuzz(StringPiece text) = 0;
+  virtual bool ShareBuzz(std::unique_ptr<Buzz> buzz, int64_t timestamp) = 0;
   ...
 };
 ```
 
-A `Buzz` object represents a snippet being posted.  A class that implements the `Buzzer` interface is capable of creating and sharing `Buzz`.  Methods in `Buzzer` may return a `unique_ptr<Buzz>` or take a `unique_ptr<Buzz>`.  Now we need to mock `Buzzer` in our tests.
-
-To mock a method that returns a move-only type, you just use the familiar `MOCK_METHOD` syntax as usual:
-
-```
-class MockBuzzer : public Buzzer {
- public:
-  MOCK_METHOD1(MakeBuzz, std::unique_ptr<Buzz>(const std::string& text));
-  …
-};
-```
-
-However, if you attempt to use the same `MOCK_METHOD` pattern to mock a method that takes a move-only parameter, you’ll get a compiler error currently:
-
-```
-  // Does NOT compile!
-  MOCK_METHOD2(ShareBuzz, bool(std::unique_ptr<Buzz> buzz, Time timestamp));
-```
-
-While it’s highly desirable to make this syntax just work, it’s not trivial and the work hasn’t been done yet.  Fortunately, there is a trick you can apply today to get something that works nearly as well as this.
+A `Buzz` object represents a snippet being posted. A class that implements the
+`Buzzer` interface is capable of creating and sharing `Buzz`es. Methods in
+`Buzzer` may return a `unique_ptr<Buzz>` or take a
+`unique_ptr<Buzz>`. Now we need to mock `Buzzer` in our tests.
 
-The trick, is to delegate the `ShareBuzz()` method to a mock method (let’s call it `DoShareBuzz()`) that does not take move-only parameters:
+To mock a method that accepts or returns move-only types, you just use the
+familiar `MOCK_METHOD` syntax as usual:
 
-```
+```cpp
 class MockBuzzer : public Buzzer {
  public:
-  MOCK_METHOD1(MakeBuzz, std::unique_ptr<Buzz>(const std::string& text));
-  MOCK_METHOD2(DoShareBuzz, bool(Buzz* buzz, Time timestamp));
-  bool ShareBuzz(std::unique_ptr<Buzz> buzz, Time timestamp) {
-    return DoShareBuzz(buzz.get(), timestamp);
-  }
+  MOCK_METHOD1(MakeBuzz, std::unique_ptr<Buzz>(StringPiece text));
+  MOCK_METHOD2(ShareBuzz, bool(std::unique_ptr<Buzz> buzz, int64_t timestamp));
 };
 ```
 
-Note that there's no need to define or declare `DoShareBuzz()` in a base class.  You only need to define it as a `MOCK_METHOD` in the mock class.
-
-Now that we have the mock class defined, we can use it in tests.  In the following code examples, we assume that we have defined a `MockBuzzer` object named `mock_buzzer_`:
+Now that we have the mock class defined, we can use it in tests. In the
+following code examples, we assume that we have defined a `MockBuzzer` object
+named `mock_buzzer_`:
 
-```
+```cpp
   MockBuzzer mock_buzzer_;
 ```
 
-First let’s see how we can set expectations on the `MakeBuzz()` method, which returns a `unique_ptr<Buzz>`.
+First let’s see how we can set expectations on the `MakeBuzz()` method, which
+returns a `unique_ptr<Buzz>`.
 
-As usual, if you set an expectation without an action (i.e. the `.WillOnce()` or `.WillRepeated()` clause), when that expectation fires, the default action for that method will be taken.  Since `unique_ptr<>` has a default constructor that returns a null `unique_ptr`, that’s what you’ll get if you don’t specify an action:
+As usual, if you set an expectation without an action (i.e. the `.WillOnce()` or
+`.WillRepeated()` clause), when that expectation fires, the default action for
+that method will be taken. Since `unique_ptr<>` has a default constructor
+that returns a null `unique_ptr`, that’s what you’ll get if you don’t specify an
+action:
 
-```
+```cpp
   // Use the default action.
   EXPECT_CALL(mock_buzzer_, MakeBuzz("hello"));
 
@@ -2307,32 +2301,13 @@ As usual, if you set an expectation without an action (i.e. the `.WillOnce()` or
   EXPECT_EQ(nullptr, mock_buzzer_.MakeBuzz("hello"));
 ```
 
-If you are not happy with the default action, you can tweak it.  Depending on what you need, you may either tweak the default action for a specific (mock object, mock method) combination using `ON_CALL()`, or you may tweak the default action for all mock methods that return a specific type.  The usage of `ON_CALL()` is similar to `EXPECT_CALL()`, so we’ll skip it and just explain how to do the latter (tweaking the default action for a specific return type).  You do this via the `DefaultValue<>::SetFactory()` and `DefaultValue<>::Clear()` API:
-
-```
-  // Sets the default action for return type std::unique_ptr<Buzz> to
-  // creating a new Buzz every time.
-  DefaultValue<std::unique_ptr<Buzz>>::SetFactory(
-      [] { return MakeUnique<Buzz>(AccessLevel::kInternal); });
-
-  // When this fires, the default action of MakeBuzz() will run, which
-  // will return a new Buzz object.
-  EXPECT_CALL(mock_buzzer_, MakeBuzz("hello")).Times(AnyNumber());
+If you are not happy with the default action, you can tweak it as usual; see
+[Setting Default Actions](#OnCall).
 
-  auto buzz1 = mock_buzzer_.MakeBuzz("hello");
-  auto buzz2 = mock_buzzer_.MakeBuzz("hello");
-  EXPECT_NE(nullptr, buzz1);
-  EXPECT_NE(nullptr, buzz2);
-  EXPECT_NE(buzz1, buzz2);
+If you just need to return a pre-defined move-only value, you can use the
+`Return(ByMove(...))` action:
 
-  // Resets the default action for return type std::unique_ptr<Buzz>,
-  // to avoid interfere with other tests.
-  DefaultValue<std::unique_ptr<Buzz>>::Clear();
-```
-
-What if you want the method to do something other than the default action?  If you just need to return a pre-defined move-only value, you can use the `Return(ByMove(...))` action:
-
-```
+```cpp
   // When this fires, the unique_ptr<> specified by ByMove(...) will
   // be returned.
   EXPECT_CALL(mock_buzzer_, MakeBuzz("world"))
@@ -2343,81 +2318,87 @@ What if you want the method to do something other than the default action?  If y
 
 Note that `ByMove()` is essential here - if you drop it, the code won’t compile.
 
-Quiz time!  What do you think will happen if a `Return(ByMove(...))` action is performed more than once (e.g. you write `….WillRepeatedly(Return(ByMove(...)));`)?  Come think of it, after the first time the action runs, the source value will be consumed (since it’s a move-only value), so the next time around, there’s no value to move from -- you’ll get a run-time error that `Return(ByMove(...))` can only be run once.
+Quiz time! What do you think will happen if a `Return(ByMove(...))` action is
+performed more than once (e.g. you write
+`.WillRepeatedly(Return(ByMove(...)));`)? Come think of it, after the first
+time the action runs, the source value will be consumed (since it’s a move-only
+value), so the next time around, there’s no value to move from -- you’ll get a
+run-time error that `Return(ByMove(...))` can only be run once.
 
-If you need your mock method to do more than just moving a pre-defined value, remember that you can always use `Invoke()` to call a lambda or a callable object, which can do pretty much anything you want:
+If you need your mock method to do more than just moving a pre-defined value,
+remember that you can always use a lambda or a callable object, which can do
+pretty much anything you want:
 
-```
+```cpp
   EXPECT_CALL(mock_buzzer_, MakeBuzz("x"))
-      .WillRepeatedly(Invoke([](const std::string& text) {
-        return std::make_unique<Buzz>(AccessLevel::kInternal);
-      }));
+      .WillRepeatedly([](StringPiece text) {
+        return MakeUnique<Buzz>(AccessLevel::kInternal);
+      });
 
   EXPECT_NE(nullptr, mock_buzzer_.MakeBuzz("x"));
   EXPECT_NE(nullptr, mock_buzzer_.MakeBuzz("x"));
 ```
 
-Every time this `EXPECT_CALL` fires, a new `unique_ptr<Buzz>` will be created and returned.  You cannot do this with `Return(ByMove(...))`.
+Every time this `EXPECT_CALL` fires, a new `unique_ptr<Buzz>` will be
+created and returned. You cannot do this with `Return(ByMove(...))`.
 
-Now there’s one topic we haven’t covered: how do you set expectations on `ShareBuzz()`, which takes a move-only-typed parameter?  The answer is you don’t.  Instead, you set expectations on the `DoShareBuzz()` mock method (remember that we defined a `MOCK_METHOD` for `DoShareBuzz()`, not `ShareBuzz()`):
+That covers returning move-only values; but how do we work with methods
+accepting move-only arguments? The answer is that they work normally, although
+some actions will not compile when any of method's arguments are move-only. You
+can always use `Return`, or a [lambda or functor](#FunctionsAsActions):
 
-```
-  EXPECT_CALL(mock_buzzer_, DoShareBuzz(NotNull(), _));
+```cpp
+  using ::testing::Unused;
 
-  // When one calls ShareBuzz() on the MockBuzzer like this, the call is
-  // forwarded to DoShareBuzz(), which is mocked.  Therefore this statement
-  // will trigger the above EXPECT_CALL.
-  mock_buzzer_.ShareBuzz(MakeUnique<Buzz>(AccessLevel::kInternal),
-                         ::base::Now());
+  EXPECT_CALL(mock_buzzer_, ShareBuzz(NotNull(), _)) .WillOnce(Return(true));
+  EXPECT_TRUE(mock_buzzer_.ShareBuzz(MakeUnique<Buzz>(AccessLevel::kInternal)),
+              0);
+
+  EXPECT_CALL(mock_buzzer_, ShareBuzz(_, _)) .WillOnce(
+      [](std::unique_ptr<Buzz> buzz, Unused) { return buzz != nullptr; });
+  EXPECT_FALSE(mock_buzzer_.ShareBuzz(nullptr, 0));
 ```
 
-Some of you may have spotted one problem with this approach: the `DoShareBuzz()` mock method differs from the real `ShareBuzz()` method in that it cannot take ownership of the buzz parameter - `ShareBuzz()` will always delete buzz after `DoShareBuzz()` returns.  What if you need to save the buzz object somewhere for later use when `ShareBuzz()` is called?  Indeed, you'd be stuck.
+Many built-in actions (`WithArgs`, `WithoutArgs`,`DeleteArg`, `SaveArg`, ...)
+could in principle support move-only arguments, but the support for this is not
+implemented yet. If this is blocking you, please file a bug.
 
-Another problem with the `DoShareBuzz()` we had is that it can surprise people reading or maintaining the test, as one would expect that `DoShareBuzz()` has (logically) the same contract as `ShareBuzz()`.
+A few actions (e.g. `DoAll`) copy their arguments internally, so they can never
+work with non-copyable objects; you'll have to use functors instead.
 
-Fortunately, these problems can be fixed with a bit more code.  Let's try to get it right this time:
+##### Legacy workarounds for move-only types {#LegacyMoveOnly}
 
-```
+Support for move-only function arguments was only introduced to gMock in April
+2017. In older code, you may encounter the following workaround for the lack of
+this feature (it is no longer necessary - we're including it just for
+reference):
+
+```cpp
 class MockBuzzer : public Buzzer {
  public:
-  MockBuzzer() {
-    // Since DoShareBuzz(buzz, time) is supposed to take ownership of
-    // buzz, define a default behavior for DoShareBuzz(buzz, time) to
-    // delete buzz.
-    ON_CALL(*this, DoShareBuzz(_, _))
-        .WillByDefault(Invoke([](Buzz* buzz, Time timestamp) {
-          delete buzz;
-          return true;
-        }));
-  }
-
-  MOCK_METHOD1(MakeBuzz, std::unique_ptr<Buzz>(const std::string& text));
-
-  // Takes ownership of buzz.
   MOCK_METHOD2(DoShareBuzz, bool(Buzz* buzz, Time timestamp));
-  bool ShareBuzz(std::unique_ptr<Buzz> buzz, Time timestamp) {
-    return DoShareBuzz(buzz.release(), timestamp);
+  bool ShareBuzz(std::unique_ptr<Buzz> buzz, Time timestamp) override {
+    return DoShareBuzz(buzz.get(), timestamp);
   }
 };
 ```
 
-Now, the mock `DoShareBuzz()` method is free to save the buzz argument for later use if this is what you want:
+The trick is to delegate the `ShareBuzz()` method to a mock method (let’s call
+it `DoShareBuzz()`) that does not take move-only parameters. Then, instead of
+setting expectations on `ShareBuzz()`, you set them on the `DoShareBuzz()` mock
+method:
 
-```
-  std::unique_ptr<Buzz> intercepted_buzz;
-  EXPECT_CALL(mock_buzzer_, DoShareBuzz(NotNull(), _))
-      .WillOnce(Invoke([&intercepted_buzz](Buzz* buzz, Time timestamp) {
-        // Save buzz in intercepted_buzz for analysis later.
-        intercepted_buzz.reset(buzz);
-        return false;
-      }));
+```cpp
+  MockBuzzer mock_buzzer_;
+  EXPECT_CALL(mock_buzzer_, DoShareBuzz(NotNull(), _));
 
-  mock_buzzer_.ShareBuzz(std::make_unique<Buzz>(AccessLevel::kInternal),
-                         Now());
-  EXPECT_NE(nullptr, intercepted_buzz);
+  // When one calls ShareBuzz() on the MockBuzzer like this, the call is
+  // forwarded to DoShareBuzz(), which is mocked.  Therefore this statement
+  // will trigger the above EXPECT_CALL.
+  mock_buzzer_.ShareBuzz(MakeUnique<Buzz>(AccessLevel::kInternal), 0);
 ```
 
-Using the tricks covered in this recipe, you are now able to mock methods that take and/or return move-only types.  Put your newly-acquired power to good use - when you design a new API, you can now feel comfortable using `unique_ptrs` as appropriate, without fearing that doing so will compromise your tests.
+
 
 ## Making the Compilation Faster ##
 
@@ -3674,6 +3655,6 @@ This printer knows how to print built-in C++ types, native arrays, STL
 containers, and any type that supports the `<<` operator.  For other
 types, it prints the raw bytes in the value and hopes that you the
 user can figure it out.
-[Google Test's advanced guide](../../googletest/docs/AdvancedGuide.md#teaching-google-test-how-to-print-your-values)
+[Google Test's advanced guide](../../googletest/docs/advanced.md#teaching-google-test-how-to-print-your-values)
 explains how to extend the printer to do a better job at
 printing your particular type than to dump the bytes.
diff --git a/googlemock/docs/DevGuide.md b/googlemock/docs/DevGuide.md
deleted file mode 100644
index cae07e70..00000000
--- a/googlemock/docs/DevGuide.md
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,132 +0,0 @@
-
-
-If you are interested in understanding the internals of Google Mock,
-building from source, or contributing ideas or modifications to the
-project, then this document is for you.
-
-# Introduction #
-
-First, let's give you some background of the project.
-
-## Licensing ##
-
-All Google Mock source and pre-built packages are provided under the [New BSD License](http://www.opensource.org/licenses/bsd-license.php).
-
-## The Google Mock Community ##
-
-The Google Mock community exists primarily through the [discussion group](http://groups.google.com/group/googlemock), the
-[issue tracker](https://github.com/google/googletest/issues) and, to a lesser extent, the [source control repository](../). You are definitely encouraged to contribute to the
-discussion and you can also help us to keep the effectiveness of the
-group high by following and promoting the guidelines listed here.
-
-### Please Be Friendly ###
-
-Showing courtesy and respect to others is a vital part of the Google
-culture, and we strongly encourage everyone participating in Google
-Mock development to join us in accepting nothing less. Of course,
-being courteous is not the same as failing to constructively disagree
-with each other, but it does mean that we should be respectful of each
-other when enumerating the 42 technical reasons that a particular
-proposal may not be the best choice. There's never a reason to be
-antagonistic or dismissive toward anyone who is sincerely trying to
-contribute to a discussion.
-
-Sure, C++ testing is serious business and all that, but it's also
-a lot of fun. Let's keep it that way. Let's strive to be one of the
-friendliest communities in all of open source.
-
-### Where to Discuss Google Mock ###
-
-As always, discuss Google Mock in the official [Google C++ Mocking Framework discussion group](http://groups.google.com/group/googlemock).  You don't have to actually submit
-code in order to sign up. Your participation itself is a valuable
-contribution.
-
-# Working with the Code #
-
-If you want to get your hands dirty with the code inside Google Mock,
-this is the section for you.
-
-## Checking Out the Source from Subversion ##
-
-Checking out the Google Mock source is most useful if you plan to
-tweak it yourself.  You check out the source for Google Mock using a
-[Subversion](http://subversion.tigris.org/) client as you would for any
-other project hosted on Google Code.  Please see the instruction on
-the [source code access page](../) for how to do it.
-
-## Compiling from Source ##
-
-Once you check out the code, you can find instructions on how to
-compile it in the [README](../README.md) file.
-
-## Testing ##
-
-A mocking framework is of no good if itself is not thoroughly tested.
-Tests should be written for any new code, and changes should be
-verified to not break existing tests before they are submitted for
-review. To perform the tests, follow the instructions in [README](../README.md) and
-verify that there are no failures.
-
-# Contributing Code #
-
-We are excited that Google Mock is now open source, and hope to get
-great patches from the community. Before you fire up your favorite IDE
-and begin hammering away at that new feature, though, please take the
-time to read this section and understand the process. While it seems
-rigorous, we want to keep a high standard of quality in the code
-base.
-
-## Contributor License Agreements ##
-
-You must sign a Contributor License Agreement (CLA) before we can
-accept any code.  The CLA protects you and us.
-
-  * If you are an individual writing original source code and you're sure you own the intellectual property, then you'll need to sign an [individual CLA](http://code.google.com/legal/individual-cla-v1.0.html).
-  * If you work for a company that wants to allow you to contribute your work to Google Mock, then you'll need to sign a [corporate CLA](http://code.google.com/legal/corporate-cla-v1.0.html).
-
-Follow either of the two links above to access the appropriate CLA and
-instructions for how to sign and return it.
-
-## Coding Style ##
-
-To keep the source consistent, readable, diffable and easy to merge,
-we use a fairly rigid coding style, as defined by the [google-styleguide](https://github.com/google/styleguide) project.  All patches will be expected
-to conform to the style outlined [here](https://google.github.io/styleguide/cppguide.html).
-
-## Submitting Patches ##
-
-Please do submit code. Here's what you need to do:
-
-  1. Normally you should make your change against the SVN trunk instead of a branch or a tag, as the latter two are for release control and should be treated mostly as read-only.
-  1. Decide which code you want to submit. A submission should be a set of changes that addresses one issue in the [Google Mock issue tracker](https://github.com/google/googletest/issues). Please don't mix more than one logical change per submittal, because it makes the history hard to follow. If you want to make a change that doesn't have a corresponding issue in the issue tracker, please create one.
-  1. Also, coordinate with team members that are listed on the issue in question. This ensures that work isn't being duplicated and communicating your plan early also generally leads to better patches.
-  1. Ensure that your code adheres to the [Google Mock source code style](#Coding_Style.md).
-  1. Ensure that there are unit tests for your code.
-  1. Sign a Contributor License Agreement.
-  1. Create a patch file using `svn diff`.
-  1. We use [Rietveld](http://codereview.appspot.com/) to do web-based code reviews.  You can read about the tool [here](https://github.com/rietveld-codereview/rietveld/wiki).  When you are ready, upload your patch via Rietveld and notify `googlemock@googlegroups.com` to review it.  There are several ways to upload the patch.  We recommend using the [upload\_gmock.py](../scripts/upload_gmock.py) script, which you can find in the `scripts/` folder in the SVN trunk.
-
-## Google Mock Committers ##
-
-The current members of the Google Mock engineering team are the only
-committers at present. In the great tradition of eating one's own
-dogfood, we will be requiring each new Google Mock engineering team
-member to earn the right to become a committer by following the
-procedures in this document, writing consistently great code, and
-demonstrating repeatedly that he or she truly gets the zen of Google
-Mock.
-
-# Release Process #
-
-We follow the typical release process for Subversion-based projects:
-
-  1. A release branch named `release-X.Y` is created.
-  1. Bugs are fixed and features are added in trunk; those individual patches are merged into the release branch until it's stable.
-  1. An individual point release (the `Z` in `X.Y.Z`) is made by creating a tag from the branch.
-  1. Repeat steps 2 and 3 throughout one release cycle (as determined by features or time).
-  1. Go back to step 1 to create another release branch and so on.
-
-
----
-
-This page is based on the [Making GWT Better](http://code.google.com/webtoolkit/makinggwtbetter.html) guide from the [Google Web Toolkit](http://code.google.com/webtoolkit/) project.  Except as otherwise [noted](http://code.google.com/policies.html#restrictions), the content of this page is licensed under the [Creative Commons Attribution 2.5 License](http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.5/).
diff --git a/googlemock/docs/Documentation.md b/googlemock/docs/Documentation.md
index a0311871..16083e70 100644
--- a/googlemock/docs/Documentation.md
+++ b/googlemock/docs/Documentation.md
@@ -11,5 +11,5 @@ the respective git branch/tag).**
 
 To contribute code to Google Mock, read:
 
-  * [DevGuide](DevGuide.md) -- read this _before_ writing your first patch.
+  * [CONTRIBUTING](../CONTRIBUTING.md) -- read this _before_ writing your first patch.
   * [Pump Manual](../../googletest/docs/PumpManual.md) -- how we generate some of Google Mock's source files.
diff --git a/googlemock/docs/ForDummies.md b/googlemock/docs/ForDummies.md
index 76910569..566a34e5 100644
--- a/googlemock/docs/ForDummies.md
+++ b/googlemock/docs/ForDummies.md
@@ -170,7 +170,7 @@ Admittedly, this test is contrived and doesn't do much. You can easily achieve t
 
 ## Using Google Mock with Any Testing Framework ##
 If you want to use something other than Google Test (e.g. [CppUnit](http://sourceforge.net/projects/cppunit/) or
-[CxxTest](http://cxxtest.tigris.org/)) as your testing framework, just change the `main()` function in the previous section to:
+[CxxTest](https://cxxtest.com/)) as your testing framework, just change the `main()` function in the previous section to:
 ```
 int main(int argc, char** argv) {
   // The following line causes Google Mock to throw an exception on failure,
@@ -187,7 +187,7 @@ sometimes causes the test program to crash.  You'll still be able to
 notice that the test has failed, but it's not a graceful failure.
 
 A better solution is to use Google Test's
-[event listener API](../../googletest/docs/AdvancedGuide.md#extending-google-test-by-handling-test-events)
+[event listener API](../../googletest/docs/advanced.md#extending-google-test-by-handling-test-events)
 to report a test failure to your testing framework properly.  You'll need to
 implement the `OnTestPartResult()` method of the event listener interface, but it
 should be straightforward.
diff --git a/googlemock/docs/FrequentlyAskedQuestions.md b/googlemock/docs/FrequentlyAskedQuestions.md
index ccaa3d7a..9008c637 100644
--- a/googlemock/docs/FrequentlyAskedQuestions.md
+++ b/googlemock/docs/FrequentlyAskedQuestions.md
@@ -528,7 +528,7 @@ interface, which then can be easily mocked.  It's a bit of work
 initially, but usually pays for itself quickly.
 
 This Google Testing Blog
-[post](http://googletesting.blogspot.com/2008/06/defeat-static-cling.html)
+[post](https://testing.googleblog.com/2008/06/defeat-static-cling.html)
 says it excellently.  Check it out.
 
 ## My mock object needs to do complex stuff.  It's a lot of pain to specify the actions.  Google Mock sucks! ##
@@ -607,7 +607,6 @@ See this [recipe](CookBook.md#mocking_side_effects) for more details and an exam
 If you cannot find the answer to your question in this FAQ, there are
 some other resources you can use:
 
-  1. read other [documentation](Documentation.md),
   1. search the mailing list [archive](http://groups.google.com/group/googlemock/topics),
   1. ask it on [googlemock@googlegroups.com](mailto:googlemock@googlegroups.com) and someone will answer it (to prevent spam, we require you to join the [discussion group](http://groups.google.com/group/googlemock) before you can post.).