> I agree 100% with your motives. As I mentioned in the other thread, I'm 
> just concerned that minitest pretends to be Test::Unit, rather than being 
> it's own framework with its own opinions. I worry that having it accessed 
> vid "require 'test/unit'" will only confuse people, and further muddy 
> folks' view of the libraries. I also feel that the Mini namespace is 
> somewhat misleading, and would encourage you to swicth to MiniTest, so 
> you could then have MiniTest::Unit, MiniTest::Spec, and so on.

Well .. as far as I understood, test::unit has been removed from Ruby
altogether. So, if what you propose were done, ALL test suites developped on 1.8
would miserably fail on 1.9, and it would be completely impossible to have
software running on both 1.8 and 1.9. That would IMO be bad, and actually may
slow down 1.9 adoption.

For my part, I still run on 1.8 and try to maintain "forward compatibility" on
1.9, because given how new 1.9 is (and given how I have been disappointed by new
versions of 1.8), I can't really trust 1.9 to "do the job".

Sylvain