Re: test/unit and miniunit

On Nov 14, 6:42 pm, Ryan Davis <[e-mail]> 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.