The machine that I am using for build has ant 1.6.5. I see that some other machines have 1.7. So it might be distributed wide enough. One thing we could do is to agree to move to 1.7 and then give people some time to upgrade. For now, I am fine with cleaning up the existing code if anybody is interested in taking that task.
Olga > -----Original Message----- > From: Charlie Groves [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Tuesday, April 01, 2008 4:06 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: JUNIT 3 vs 4 > > Right, I was only hoping that we'd pick one and stick to it. > Having a mix of nonfunctional JUnit 4 annotations in with > JUnit 3 tests is just confusing. > > Moving to JUnit 4 requires Ant 1.7 which has been out since > December 2006. The fact that Olga doesn't have it makes me > feel like it hasn't spread enough to be worth switching to, > so I'd be happy if we just got rid of the JUnit 4 annotations. > > Charlie > > On Apr 1, 2008, at 2:37 PM, Olga Natkovich wrote: > > According to Charlie, it means that everybody would also need to > > upgrade ant to the version that support JUnit 4 > > > > Olga > > > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: Benjamin Reed [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> Sent: Tuesday, April 01, 2008 2:32 PM > >> To: [email protected] > >> Subject: JUNIT 3 vs 4 > >> > >> Charlie made some good points about our use of JUnit 4 > annotations in > >> our code versus our use of JUnit 3. Is there a reason we are not > >> using JUnit 4? Does it not work on the Mac? > >> > >> ben > >> > > > >
