From: Trans Date: 2007-11-15T11:43:04+09:00 Subject: Re: test/unit and miniunit On Nov 14, 6:42 pm, Ryan Davis wrote: > When is the 1.9 freeze? > > I'd like to export test/unit as a rubygem and replace it with miniunit. > > miniunit is: > > + 100% compatible with existing tests (including tests to verify). > + less than 10% of the code (3571 loc vs 304). > + documents all the method it uses so it is ideal for language > implementors. > - 0% compatible with all the other bells and whistles of test/unit > (runners) > + meaning: it is console only. > + However, being incredibly small makes it a LOT easier to hook into. > + it has already been hooked into via Phil's augment project. sounds good. but what happens to all the other runners? might miniunit just replace test/unit then and test/units runners and extra bells and whistle get be converted to an extra package that hooks into this? i'm all for it, but it would be a shame to LOOSE capabilities. > I'm also working with the rubinius crew's minirspec to see if the two > can't merge and share a common base. If they can, I'd love to import > minirspec into ruby as well (it'd be a VERY clean addition to > miniunit) so that ruby ships compatible either testing philosophy out > of the box. i think you'll have a much harder time getting rspec's dsl to be "mini", but even so i would prefer that it be held-off. presently the talk is about removing some libs, not adding more. (speaking of which what's the consensus here --what's matz considering?) > I've talked to matz about this change and he approved for 1.9, but I > don't know if I have to time to do it w/in the timeframe of the freeze. > > I'd also like to open up the possibility of making this change on the > 1.8 side as well, but that is a different email. :) I would leave 1.8 be. I don't think there's much sense it back-porting such a significant change. T.