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