Oskar Sandberg wrote: >To not create problems for Junit, I don't want to give identical names >to any classes unless they really are identical. > I understand this ... but:
There are no problem, as long s you create a strict subset of junits functionality. Problems start occuring, when providing features, that junit does not have. The SimpleTestRunner is such a feature. Whenever using it, things will not work with junit. If we remove the main() files, the test.sh script will still not work. All other code, that uses more of junit's functionality, than is provided will fail anyway. Therefor renaming the TestRunner is the lesser of two evils .... (imo) And I think while using tests it is very important that they run on first try, otherwise nobody will use them. "make test" or "ant test". Niklas _______________________________________________ Devl mailing list Devl at freenetproject.org http://lists.freenetproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devl
