Hi Ayende, > Yes, I think that we aren't going to have any choice and we would support > side-by-side execution. Great :)
> I don't want to change the name, though. Understood. Actually I too would hate to do so. I have heard that another Mock framework would like to support existing RhinoMocks syntax by providing exact same public class/interface/method names under a different namespace. I was wondering why this is necessary. *If* I'm going to embark Xyz mock framework, all I need to do is leaving the RhinoMocks as is and add reference to Xyz. I need to do nothing to start taking advantage of Xyz. Their proposal will actually make my life harder because I will be forced to change the namespace in every test classes. I'm a bit concerned about how the side-by-side execution will be implemented. If it is done by moving all the old syntax to another namespace and Rhino.Mocks are now used by 4.0 new syntax. Then it becomes a problem for an evolving project with half (and large amount) of tests completed with old syntax. 1. I cannot reference to both 3.6.dll and 4.0.dll, they conflict in namespace. 2. If use 4.0.dll + compatible.dll, I need to touch almost every each test fixture. In this case, moving to Xyz would be an easier option then upgrading to 4.0. So from a user perspective, I would love to see 4.0 in a new namespace rather then Rhino.Mocks. Be it RhinoMocks without dot, Rhino.Mocks4 or whatever, I bet there are smart souls here can come up with a cool name that keeps the branding of Rhino Mocks but a different namespace then 3.x. I believe this also simplifies the development of 4.0 as there is no need for compatibility.dll. Thoughts? Just my 2 cents :) Cheers, Kenneth --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Rhino.Mocks" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rhinomocks?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
