On Sep 25, 2008, at 2:05 PM, Ryan Davis wrote:

>> Well, to be fair, it isn't really compatible.
>
> where? I've done a lot to make sure that it is 100% compatible for  
> tests. It is NOT compatible with the old internals, and that is out  
> of scope for this project. We ensured that if that was a blocker  
> that it was taken care of by releasing test/unit as a gem.

It complains about the deprecation of many of the Test::Unit tests,  
which kind of makes the running of existing tests very noisy. I guess  
that, for me, compatible would mean a silent shoe-in.

Now, is it wrong to deprecate these tests? I don't think so. But I  
think it is misleading from a programmer's point of view that the  
interface to load the library is the same

   require 'test/unit'

but the behavior is different.

I think I'd rather see minitest/unit as an entity in its own right. If  
it is better, then people will just use it (and it has the added  
advantage of being built-in). But folks who prefer Test::Unit will  
still be able to 'require test/unit' (after installing the Gem) and  
unambiguously run the old library.

My suggestion is not to do with the functionality. It's simply the  
overloading of the require.


Dave