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:
http://anonsvn.mono-project.com/viewvc?view=rev&revision=117080 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. Alan. On Tue, Nov 25, 2008 at 8:00 PM, Charlie Poole <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 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. > > Charlie > > ________________________________ > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Miguel De Icaza > Sent: Tuesday, November 25, 2008 10:12 AM > To: Michael Franz > Cc: [email protected] > Subject: SPAM-LOW: Re: [Mono-list] NUnit Version - Upgrade soon? > > Hello, > > Is it ok to submit patches to mono that depend on the latest version of > NUnit? > > As long as the resulting code *builds* you can. > So I think this means "no". > Miguel. > > Michael > > On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 3:25 PM, Miguel de Icaza <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 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 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> > 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 - [email protected] > http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-list > > _______________________________________________ Mono-list maillist - [email protected] http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-list
