[rspec-devel] merging rbehave into rspec

[David Chelimsky]

On 8/7/07, Dan North <dan at tastapod.com> wrote:
>
>  I solved the @options thing by renaming my property to @run_options.
> Although the correct fix would be to have all the mock properties and
> methods prepended with something like @__rspec_options to keep the method
> namespace clear for mocked objects.

I think we overlapped a bit here - I already fixed the @options
problem directly in rspec and merged in the change to the
rbehave-import branch. I didn't rename @options as you suggest, but I
made it so that if the object itself is a Mock, it uses @options,
otherwise it does not. That solved the failures in spec/story.

FYI - I'm open to changing @options to @__rspec_options - if you want
to do that (Dan) go ahead.

>  I really appreciate you guys fixing the underlying issues as they come up
> (like mock.options). I'll just focus on getting rbehave integrated into
> rspec, changing rbehave to work with the current rspec cut where they clash.
>
>  I haven't got 100% coverage yet, although I was quite pleased with 96%+ at
> first go :)

Per my previous email - the remaining problems are going to probably
require some refactoring in order to get them covered without having
some gnarly specs.

>
>  I'll get that working, plus I've imported the Game of Life example into
> rspec/examples/story/game-of-life. Then I'll wait for
> David's blessing to merge into trunk.

I want to get 1.0.6 released before we merge this in. For that I'm
waiting on Aslak to tie up a couple of loose ends related to the new
Spec::Distributed.

We've also got Brian's work on simplifying the whole object runner
object model (say that 10 times fast) so we'll need to coordinate on
merging efforts. Ideally, I'd like to see both branches merged in
after 1.0.6 and then we'd be working towards a 1.1.0 release.

Cheers,
David

>
>  Cheers,
>  Dan
>
>
>  David Chelimsky wrote:
>  On 8/6/07, Scott Taylor <mailing_lists at railsnewbie.com> wrote:
>
>
>  What is the protocol for submitting patches? Should we be submitting
> them through RSpec's tracker?
>
>  Now that there is a branch, yes please. Please reference the branch in
> the ticket, along w/ the revision number you are patching (as there
> will likely be some activity in the next few days).
>
> Thanks,
> David
>
>
>
>  Scott
>
>
> On Aug 6, 2007, at 6:58 PM, James Deville wrote:
>
>
>
>  Dan,
>
> In response to your question about specific files/behaviors, I will
> be sending a patch this eventing that will expose the -e option
> through rake spec:e. Hope it helps.
>
> Jim Deville
>
> On 8/6/07, Dan North <dan at tastapod.com> wrote:
> Hi folks.
>
> The merge is a bit more involved than I thought, mostly due to my
> poor understanding of rspec mocks, so I've created a branch at
> http://rspec.rubyforge.org/svn/branches/rbehave-import if
> anyone
> wants to monitor progress or get involved.
>
> Quick update: all classes and modules in the RBehave namespace have
> been moved into Spec::Story verbatim (along with their examples of
> course). This means that, for instance, there are currently two
> PendingException classes - rbehave's and rspec's.
>
> I still have 2 examples failing (same problem in two places) that
> seem to be about how I'm using rspec's mocking framework. If anyone
> can spot the deliberate error I'd be very grateful. The line is:
>
>  Runner.stub!(:dry_run).and_return(true)
>
> which is giving me the error:
>
>  can't convert Spec::Story::Runner::Options into Hash
>
> Once these are working, the next step is to ensure the rcov
> coverage is up to 100% and get the pre-commit rake target passing.
>
> Cheers,
> Dan
>
>
>
> Scott Taylor wrote:
>
>
>  On Aug 2, 2007, at 11:00 PM, David Chelimsky wrote:
>
>
>
>  On 8/2/07, Scott Taylor <mailing_lists at railsnewbie.com> wrote:
>
>
>  There seems to be quite a few of us who want to help. What is the
> state of this project? Is this being worked on in the Rbehave
> repos? Maybe the RSpec admins could create a branch in the rspec
> repos to facilitate this merging.
>
>  Thanks to all for your interest. I need to talk to Aslak and Dan
> about
> how we're going to do this, so please hang tight.
>
>  Thanks David. I guess I'm still a little unsure whether the whole
> code base will be merged in to RSpec, or whether it will stay
> separate but the World modules will get mixed into RSpec somehow or
> another.
>
> I guess we will wait a few days to hear the news.
>
> Best,
>
> Scott
>
>
>
>  Cheers,
> David
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-devel mailing list
> rspec-devel at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/
> rspec-devel
>
>  _______________________________________________
> rspec-devel mailing list
> rspec-devel at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/
> rspec-devel
>
>  _______________________________________________
> rspec-devel mailing list
> rspec-devel at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-devel
>
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-devel mailing list
> rspec-devel at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-devel
>
>  _______________________________________________
> rspec-devel mailing list
> rspec-devel at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-devel
>
>
>  _______________________________________________
> rspec-devel mailing list
> rspec-devel at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-devel
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-devel mailing list
> rspec-devel at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-devel
>