Hi,

In message "Re: Adding Test::Unit to CVS"
    on 03/01/23, Dave Thomas <dave / pragmaticprogrammer.com> writes:

|>  Also, while I guess Rubicon may be
|> part of the distribution someday, it isn't today, which means there
|> isn't a good place for the Test::Unit tests to go (yet).
|
|Is there a reason that rubicon couldn't be included? It seems pretty 
|stable (Nathaniel's recent patch notwithstanding).

The only reason I can think of is absence of Test::Unit in the
distribution.  So it's kinda like chikens and eggs.

							matz.