On Sep 24, 2008, at 12:47 , Dave Thomas wrote:

> What's the correct way to load it up:
>
> require 'test/unit'
>
> or
>
> require 'mini/unit'
>
> I understand that the former brings in deprecated functionality (and  
> I'll describe that), but, going forward, should I encourage people  
> to use mini/unit?

I'm open to suggestions... the only other thing that test/unit does is  
call:

   Mini::Test.autorun

so I could see people either:

1) sticking to "require 'test/unit'" as the autorunning require
2) adding a mini/???.rb that is an autorunning require.
3) switching to "require 'mini/test'" and adding a call to  
Mini::Test.autorun where they see fit.

I punted and decided that test/unit was fine for now... thinking that  
eventually it'll be a file with just a call to autorun.