[Mono-list] SPAM-LOW: Re: NUnit Version - Upgrade soon?

Tue Nov 25 11:19:03 EST 2008

Juan,

NUnit requires the nunit.framework assembly to be either in the GAC, or in
the same directory as the test assembly.

I would like to see this changed, but Charlie (NUnit) prefers to keep things
as is.

I don't think any of the other assemblies need to be in the GAC though.

Gert

PS. I'm copying Charlie in on this, so he can correct me if necessary.

From: mono-list-bounces at lists.ximian.com
[mailto:mono-list-bounces at lists.ximian.com] On Behalf Of Juan C. Olivares
Sent: dinsdag 25 november 2008 14:50
To: Sebastien Pouliot
Cc: mono-list at lists.ximian.com
Subject: Re: [Mono-list] SPAM-LOW: Re: NUnit Version - Upgrade soon?

Mono installs its NUnit version on the GAC when you compile mono. If it's a
private version, why it's installed on the GAC?

Regards
Juan C. Olivares

On Tue, Nov 25, 2008 at 10:24 AM, Sebastien Pouliot
<sebastien.pouliot at gmail.com> wrote:

Hello Charlie,

On Mon, 2008-11-24 at 23:38 -0800, Charlie Poole wrote:
> I didn't know it was your archive, but if you need it
> then it seemed to make sense that there would be some
> changes. If not, why build it from source at all?
>
> This isn't a criticism - just something I'm trying to
> get an understanding about. There seems to be some
> obstacle to NUnit adoption (I don't mean obsolete
> versions, but up to date ones) in the Mono community
> and I'd like to figure out the reasons.

You simply did too well on NUnit 2.2 ;-) and no one, until Atsushi,
needed the features "badly" enough to update the mono tree (potentially
a huge task).

OTOH this might have been interpreted by other people as being the
(only?) "supported" version - even if we have been saying, for years,
not to confuse the old Mono's version with the latest and greatest NUnit
available.

Sebastien

>
> Charlie
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: mono-list-bounces at lists.ximian.com
> > [mailto:mono-list-bounces at lists.ximian.com] On Behalf Of Atsushi Eno
> > Sent: Monday, November 24, 2008 10:19 PM
> > To: mono-list at lists.ximian.com
> > Subject: Re: [Mono-list] SPAM-LOW: Re: NUnit Version - Upgrade soon?
> >
> > It is anything but negative approach. As I wrote earlier, I
> > believe this is a mono bug that likely hits other projects
> > and should be fixed in mono land.
> >
> > I'll try to cook a repro and file a bug.
> >
> > For the record, there is almost no change in NUnit code in my archive.
> > We just have to change AssemblyInfo (assembly key location),
> > remove tests (they are extra in our source tree) and extra
> > stuff such as GUI.
> > It is straightforward upstream code. Believe or not, just diff them ;)
> >
> > Atsushi Eno
> >
> >
> > Charlie Poole wrote:
> > > I think a more positive approach would be to work with the NUnit
> > > project so that you can just use the upstream code.
> > >
> > > Charlie
> > >
> > >> -----Original Message-----
> > >> From: mono-list-bounces at lists.ximian.com
> > >> [mailto:mono-list-bounces at lists.ximian.com] On Behalf Of
> > Atsushi Eno
> > >> Sent: Saturday, November 22, 2008 4:30 PM
> > >> To: mono-list at lists.ximian.com
> > >> Subject: SPAM-LOW: Re: [Mono-list] NUnit Version - Upgrade soon?
> > >>
> > >> You almost do not have to do that:
> > >> http://veritas-vos-liberabit.com/tmp/2008/nunit24-mono.tar.bz2
> > >>
> > >> It builds but does not work anyways right now, probably because of
> > >> some type resolution bugs between nunit-console.dll and
> > >> nunit-console.exe.
> > >>
> > >> If you have patch for mono (diff in mono/mcs, not diff in
> > >> nunit) to fix any issues, that is welcome.
> > >>
> > >> Atsushi Eno
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> Michael Franz wrote:
> > >>> OK,
> > >>>
> > >>> I thought I read somewhere that there were patches to NUnit
> > >> that were
> > >>> mono specific.
> > >>>
> > >>> Is it ok to submit patches to mono that depend on the
> > >> latest version
> > >>> of NUnit?
> > >>>
> > >>> Michael
> > >>>
> > >>> On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 3:25 PM, Miguel de Icaza
> > <miguel at novell.com
> > >>> <mailto:miguel at novell.com>> wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>>     Hello,
> > >>>
> > >>>      > What changes to NUnit were specific to Mono?
> > >>>      >
> > >>>      > Is there a list of these features?
> > >>>
> > >>>     You are confused;   There are no changes, you should
> > >> just not depend on
> > >>>     Mono's built-in and private copy of NUnit to write your
> > >> NUnit test
> > >>>     cases.
> > >>>
> > >>>     You should get the latest NUnit.
> > >>>
> > >>>      > On Sun, Nov 16, 2008 at 10:54 PM, Miguel de Icaza
> > >>>     <miguel at novell.com <mailto:miguel at novell.com>>
> > >>>      > wrote:
> > >>>      >         Hello,
> > >>>      >
> > >>>      >
> > >>>      >         > I use NUnit for work and have been using
> > >> the latest version
> > >>>      >         for
> > >>>      >         > months.  I wrote some test for Mono and
> > >> found out that the
> > >>>      >         version
> > >>>      >         > that Mono is using does not support some
> > >> of the asserts
> > >>>     I am
> > >>>      >         using
> > >>>      >         > (IsEmpty).  Is there any plan to upgrade
> > >> the version of
> > >>>      >         NUnit that is
> > >>>      >         > used with the Mono build/test?
> > >>>      >
> > >>>      >
> > >>>      >         The NUnit that ships with Mono should be considered
> > >>>     Mono's own
> > >>>      >         copy of
> > >>>      >         NUnit and not a public version of it.
> > >>>      >
> > >>>      >         We should probably make packages of the
> > >> latest version of
> > >>>      >         NUnit,
> > >>>      >         encourage the NUnit developer to maintain
> > >> those and encourage
> > >>>      >         developers
> > >>>      >         to use the public NUnit as opposed to the
> > >> private copy that
> > >>>      >         Mono ships.
> > >>>      >
> > >>>      >
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > >> -
> > >>> --
> > >>>
> > >>> _______________________________________________
> > >>> Mono-list maillist  -  Mono-list at lists.ximian.com
> > >>> http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-list
> > >> _______________________________________________
> > >> Mono-list maillist  -  Mono-list at lists.ximian.com
> > >> http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-list
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Mono-list maillist  -  Mono-list at lists.ximian.com
> > > http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-list
> > >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Mono-list maillist  -  Mono-list at lists.ximian.com
> > http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-list
> >
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Mono-list maillist  -  Mono-list at lists.ximian.com
> http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-list

_______________________________________________
Mono-list maillist  -  Mono-list at lists.ximian.com
http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-list

No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com
Version: 8.0.175 / Virus Database: 270.9.9/1806 - Release Date: 11/22/2008
6:59 PM

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.ximian.com/pipermail/mono-list/attachments/20081125/723495fa/attachment-0001.html 