The path to import/require React Test Utils is now react-dom/test-utils instead of react-dom/lib/ReactTestUtils. The tests would have to update all those references.

The react-addons-test-utils dependency could probably also be removed.

@dahlbyk I found a few more test issues: es2015 references that required a polyfill, createRenderer() moved to another dependency, and a suite that depends on a variable sharing between specs but was failing.

I've got these issues fixed locally and all tests pass now. Do you want this in a separate PR? Or merged into release-0.8.2? Happy to do whatever is easiest!

@thathenderson a PR into this branch is probably easiest, if you don't mind.

I have never dealt with targeting multiple React versions, so my biggest concern is making sure stuff keeps working with older version (especially for v0.x). Or am I being overly paranoid about devDependencies?

@dahlbyk You know, I was wondering about that too. As of React 15.5, Test Utils was moved inside react-dom and testutils.createRenderer was moved to a separate react-test-renderer package, which means the apis the tests use need to change. 15.5 would have to be the lowest supported React/ReactDom versions.

Does v0 still need to offer support for React 15.4 and below (including 0.14.x)?

I guess we could have different react/react-dom versions in devDependencies than in peerDependencies? Is that bad practice?

Does v0 still need to offer support for React 15.4 and below (including 0.14.x)?

I need @joellanciaux and/or @ryanlanciaux to weigh in on this. I'm mostly here for 1.0+.

I guess we could have different react/react-dom versions in devDependencies than in peerDependencies? Is that bad practice?

A bit unconventional, perhaps, but I can't see much way around it if one intends wide support. It does lower one's confidence in tests; realistically tests should be run for React 14 and 15 and 16, but I have no idea how to pull that off.

It does lower one's confidence in tests; realistically tests should be run for React 14 and 15 and 16, but I have no idea how to pull that off.

Agreed. I'm not sure there's a way to continue supporting an api that's multiple deprecations behind, while also trying to support the latest.

Any update on the review here?
@ryanlanciaux @joellanciaux