mchaloupka
commented
5 months ago I like the value you are adding by this pull request. It took me quite some time to think about it to suggest what is the right course of action. It seems that the value in this pull request can be separated into three separate areas:
- NUnit wiring
- Build-time test generator
- Documentation generator
I would prefer to have these as independent pull requests, so we can focus in each on doing the right thing. My suggestion would be to start with the NUnit wiring (similarly as we have it for xunit) to create an opinionated way to use Tickspec using NUnit. That should ideally be used in our examples and later in your Build-time test generator.
The documentation generator is orthogonal to that functionality, worth treating it separately then. For the documentation, it may be interesting if you can provide an example output and information how do you use it, so we can discuss what is the customization that should be supported. I can imagine that in the initial version it can be quite rough and tailored just for your needs (if sensible) and over time we can add the abilities to customize it. It is worth looking at https://fsprojects.github.io/FSharp.Formatting/ for inspiration how such thing can work.
First step towards integrating TickSpec.Build project into TickSpec.
Open question: How should TickSpec.Build be published as nuget? Probably as separate package because of todays dependencies to NUnit? As "TickSpec.Build" nuget package already exists, what would be a good, non-conflicting name?