Am 02.11.2004 um 06:39 schrieb Andreas Raab:

> Hi Guys,
>
> I don't know how many people out there use 3.8 (or 3.7 for that  
> matter) but given the behavior of TestRunner I cannot imagine that  
> many people use it for daily work. In moving some code from 3.6 to 3.8  
> I immediately noticed that some important things have been broken,  
> others removed, as if it were the goal to make it harder to run tests.  
> How odd.
>
> More specifically:
>
> #1: As has been pointed out in the thread starting at  
> http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/2004-March/ 
> 074876.html TestRunner is STILL broken if you run any UI tests with  
> it. It's six months now during which the people who have argued this  
> broken behavior to be a "feature" have done absolutely nothing to  
> improve the situation. ARGH!
>

Ok, yes, I should have put that into the SUnit package sooner... I will  
soon.

> #2: For some odd reason, someone must have decided that a nicer look  
> of TestRunner is more important than the work it does. So what we got  
> in this process is a beautifully anti-aliased progress bar ... and  
> what we lost is the ability to easily run multiple tests at once  
> (yeah, who'd need that eh?! ;-)
>
>

I was 100% sure that the idea of an abstract testcase was that they are  
supposed to be abstract classes. (Do not show up in Testrunner, test
are inherited by the children). I never had the idea to use them for  
grouping tests... so with that mental model, I added the fixes that  
removed
the abstract tests from the testrunner that were postet to the list.
(Having Abstract classes in the TestRunner has the problem that "run  
all" then runs tests multiple times).

For grouping, I wanted to add a pane with the sytemcategories to the  
testrunner. But I havn't yet come around to do that.

Another thing I should look at again is Romain's BrowseUnit. I used an  
older version a lot.

     Marcus