Restructure pkg/unittest and pkg/webdriver to follow the pub conventions.

tests/isolate/isolate_negative_test.dart

Index: tests/isolate/isolate_negative_test.dart
===================================================================
--- tests/isolate/isolate_negative_test.dart	(revision 14313)
+++ tests/isolate/isolate_negative_test.dart	(working copy)
@@ -4,9 +4,9 @@
 
 // Dart test program for testing that isolates are spawned.
 
-#library('IsolateNegativeTest');
-#import('dart:isolate');
-#import('../../pkg/unittest/unittest.dart');
+library IsolateNegativeTest;
+import 'dart:isolate';
+import '../../pkg/unittest/lib/unittest.dart';
 
 void entry() {
   port.receive((ignored, replyTo) {
@@ -18,7 +18,7 @@
   test("ensure isolate code is executed", () {
     SendPort port = spawnFunction(entry);
     port.call("foo").then(expectAsync1((message) {
-      Expect.equals(true, "Expected fail");   // <=-------- Should fail here.
+      expect("Expected fail", isFail);   // <=-------- Should fail here.

[Siggi Cherem (dart-lang), 2012/10/31 20:54:02]

isFail? isFalse? 

or replace with unittest.fail()?

speaking of which, should unittest.fail move to expect.dart?

[gram, 2012/11/01 21:23:19]

Yes, this should be isFalse; fixed.

expect does not depend on unittest, so no, unittest.fail should not be part of
it.

[Siggi Cherem (dart-lang), 2012/11/01 21:40:54]

what I meant to say is that [unittest.fail] is a generic fail function similar
to expect(false, true). So it seems like if it belongs in the same place as
expect. Unittest imports it and rexports it so it will have access to it
anyways.

     }));
   });
 }