Re: NUnit Version Numbering

2005/12/11, Charlie Poole <charlie@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
> From my point of view, this solves one part of the problem: the ability to
> run a .Net 1.1 versus a .Net 2.0 NUnit build on mono. Ideally, we could
> extend it to allow multiple versions of NUnit...

Well, actually it is not really an issue. You can just install one
version of nunit (all its assemblies) into one directory and the other
one into another directory and they will just work. The only problem
is that you then need to do an extra stuff to reference it - in
particular you need to give the full path where to find
nunit.framework.dll and when executing the test runner. But since this
is exactly the same way as in Windows, it is not a problem.
As you say mono will probably always have its own version used to
build/test mono itself and it should not conflict with any other
installation of nunit.

>
> As an aside, I'm still not convinced that a single build of NUnit couldn't
> be made to work on Mono, just as it works on Windows .Net.

But it doesn't on Windows!!! Otherwise we would not need nunit-2.2.3
and nunit-2.0-2.2.3 (they are exactly the separate builds of NUnit,
which are needed to make everyting work on Windows).

>
> Charlie
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Kamil Skalski [mailto:kamil.skalski@xxxxxxxxx]
> > Sent: Sunday, December 11, 2005 6:31 AM
> > To: Gert Driesen
> > Cc: Rubenstein, Shmarya; Charlie Poole; Matt Hargett; nunit-
> > developer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Subject: Re: [nunit-developer] NUnit Version Numbering
> >
> > I created a patch for mono (see
> > http://bugzilla.ximian.com/show_bug.cgi?id=76928), which seems to be
> > the correct solution - it installs two versions of nunit under
> > mono/nunit and mono/nunit2, nothing is installed into the GAC (because
> > it is not needed).
> >
> > In general I think that mono should not ship with nunit inside - it
> > should be installed separately and it should be the original nunit
> > from nunit.org. Of course bundling nunit with mono tree is needed to
> > have out of the box experience when building and testing mono itself.
> > But assuming that mono developers want to stay with it as it is, then
> > my patch solves the problem of writing tests using .NET 2.0 features.
> >
> >
> > 2005/12/8, Gert Driesen <gert.driesen@xxxxxxxxxx>:
> > >
> > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: nunit-developer-admin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > [mailto:nunit-developer-admin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On
> > > > Behalf Of Rubenstein, Shmarya
> > > > Sent: donderdag 8 december 2005 22:15
> > > > To: Charlie Poole; Matt Hargett; Kamil Skalski
> > > > Cc: nunit-developer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > Subject: RE: [nunit-developer] NUnit Version Numbering
> > > >
> > > > Regarding 3: check out the NDoc 1.3 distribution. They manage
> > > > to package mono, 1.0, 1.1 and (I Think!) 2.0 assemblies
> > > > without too much trouble.
> > >
> > > We didn't package 2.0 assemblies for NDoc 1.3 (if I recall correctly) as
> > at
> > > that time, we were not allowed to distribute assemblies built using .NET
> > 2.0
> > > beta's.
> > >
> > > But there's indeed no problem creating a setup that includes different
> > > (framework) versions, and allow the end-user to select which version(s)
> > to
> > > install.
> > >
> > > Gert
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Kamil Skalski
> > http://nazgul.omega.pl
>
>
>


--
Kamil Skalski
http://nazgul.omega.pl


-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Do you grep through log files
for problems?  Stop!  Download the new AJAX search engine that makes
searching your log files as easy as surfing the  web.  DOWNLOAD SPLUNK!
http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_idv37&alloc_id865&op=click