Lack of maintainers, too many unwanted features, lack of explanation, large changes...
And this is not that several persons did not look at the code. It got more than the average. Now I'm thinking that with discussion and care we should really get another testing framework with the same API that SUnit because if we want that PharoSunit is the same as Sunit then we are doomed to be backward compatible and no real improvements. Stef On Oct 23, 2010, at 10:58 PM, Adrian Kuhn wrote: > Sad to hear that. > > Technical difficulties, or just lack of customers? ^^ > > --AA > > On Oct 23, 2010, at 08:05 , Stéphane Ducasse wrote: > >> It was too difficult to integrate. >> >> Stef >> >> On Oct 23, 2010, at 2:01 PM, Niko Schwarz wrote: >> >>> What's the status of akuhn/SUnit? I couldn't find his code in 1.2 core. >>> >>> Niko >>> >>> On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 1:13 PM, Stéphane Ducasse >>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> this loads well in the latest 1,1 core :) >>>> so now we should really have a look and these cool changes >>>> >>>> Stef >>>> >>>> On Jan 6, 2010, at 2:38 PM, Adrian Kuhn wrote: >>>> >>>>> SystemChangeNotifier uniqueInstance >>>>> noMoreNotificationsFor: TestCase. >>>>> Gofer it >>>>> disablePackageCache; >>>>> squeaksource: 'akuhn'; >>>>> package: 'SUnit'; >>>>> package: 'SUnitGUI'; >>>>> load. >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Pharo-project mailing list >>>> [email protected] >>>> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> http://scg.unibe.ch/staff/Schwarz >>> twitter.com/nes1983 >>> Tel: +41 076 235 8683 >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Pharo-project mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project >> > _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
