Other than migrating this from CVS to Subversion and putting their own GUI on it this looks uncannily like the system I implemented on a project 5 years ago. If this improves adoption with projects that have less of a testing mentality then its a good thing but I think everything here has been established as best practice some years back.

There are a couple of features that I have found valuable in the past 5 years that do not appear to be in Gauntlet yet - the one I'd put in first if I was them is a full mirror of the package structure in the SVN repository to hold the test code. Once it is in the repository it can share the labels and branches of the code itself which will save your sanity when the project gets messy.

If "everything here has been established as best practice some years back" then Borland is to be congratulated!

It sometimes seeems that the norm in IT product development is to ignore everything experienced practitioners know; and then re-invent the wheel, to produce products which aren't really usable in practice until the second or third release.

Take established good practice and make it more accessible? It'll never catch on....