[Mono-list] SPAM-LOW: Re: NUnit Version - Upgrade soon?
alan.mcgovern at gmail.com
Tue Nov 25 15:30:56 EST 2008
Just while the discussion is going on, I'd like to point out this
recent commit I had to make purely because mono supplies an archaic
version of NUnit:
As an example:
- Assert.Less(lastSeen, node.LastSeen, "#2");
+ Assert.IsTrue (lastSeen < node.LastSeen, "#2");
It'd be great if I didn't have to do out to maintain compatibility
with an out-of-box install.
On Tue, Nov 25, 2008 at 8:00 PM, Charlie Poole <charlie at nunit.com> wrote:
> Hi Miguel,
> Amusing but true. :-)
> I am thinking about how to foster adoption of new NUnit versions more
> quickly under Mono. Trying to list the obstacles, I come up with the
> following - you may add or correct me, of course.
> 1. NUnit is used as both a build tool for Mono itself and as an tool for
> developers creating applications under Mono. Up to now, I think
> we have failed to treat these two uses as distinct problems, possibly
> calling for distinct solutions.
> 2. The NUnit team doesn't provide a decent install for NUnit on Linux.
> 3. The expectations of developers about how multiple versions of
> NUnit should co-exist on Linux and Windows are somewhat
> different. In Windows, it's all xcopy deployment without use
> of the GAC. In Linux, Mono apps seem to be placed in the
> GAC quite freely - my observation, anyway - and placed
> there in a way that makes side-by-side installation difficult.
> [I don't think the last is a technical issue, but rather one
> of different communities expecting different things to work.]
> 4. Depending on how you get a binary install of Mono, NUnit
> may come with it or may be a separate package. Separate
> packaging would make updates easier.
> 5. The Mono coding standards for tests encourage use of
> techniques that pre-date NUnit 2.0. Some of the methods
> used have been marked obsolete for many years and
> are disappearing in the next NUnit release.
> Feel free to correct me and/or add to this. Next, I'd like to
> think about solutions.
> From: mono-list-bounces at lists.ximian.com
> [mailto:mono-list-bounces at lists.ximian.com] On Behalf Of Miguel De Icaza
> Sent: Tuesday, November 25, 2008 10:12 AM
> To: Michael Franz
> Cc: mono-list at lists.ximian.com
> Subject: SPAM-LOW: Re: [Mono-list] NUnit Version - Upgrade soon?
> Is it ok to submit patches to mono that depend on the latest version of
> As long as the resulting code *builds* you can.
> So I think this means "no".
> On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 3:25 PM, Miguel de Icaza <miguel at novell.com> wrote:
>> > 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
>> You should get the latest NUnit.
>> > On Sun, Nov 16, 2008 at 10:54 PM, Miguel de Icaza <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
More information about the Mono-list