[rspec-devel] Translated Specs?

[Dan North]

Forgive me chiming in here.

My understanding of the conventions for 3-part numbering are:

Major release (1.x -> 2.0) can break compatibility with deprecated APIs
Minor release (1.3, -> 1.4) maintains backward compatibility but can 
introduce new interfaces
Patch release (1.3.2 -> 1.3.3) is a bugfix that doesn't change any 
(significant) APIs

(This is stolen from http://jmock.org/versioning.html).

If you want to remove the old non-matcher expectations (and thereby 
break backward compatibility), you might want to consider a 2.0 release. 
So the question is, are we ready for a 2.0 release yet?*

Cheers,
Dan

* For my opinion on this you only need buy me a beer - I'm pretty cheap.


David Chelimsky wrote:
> On 8/19/07, aslak hellesoy <aslak.hellesoy at gmail.com> wrote:
>   
>> On 8/19/07, David Chelimsky <dchelimsky at gmail.com> wrote:
>>     
>>> On 8/19/07, aslak hellesoy <aslak.hellesoy at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>       
>>>> On 8/19/07, David Chelimsky <dchelimsky at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>         
>>>>> On 8/18/07, Brian Takita <brian.takita at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>           
>>>>>> Can somebody explain what the translated specs are?
>>>>>>             
>>>>> Funny - that was added when we were preparing for 1.0 as a test for
>>>>> the translator. The translator is still necessary, but the translated
>>>>> specs are obsolete at this point (as there is nothing to actually
>>>>> translate).
>>>>>
>>>>> Aslak - can you weigh in on this? Unless you think otherwise, I'd like
>>>>> to kill that part of the pre_commit process.
>>>>>
>>>>>           
>>>> The translator translates deprecated code (which we still have - the matchers).
>>>>         
>>> Do you mean the mock argument constraints that are expressed as Symbols?
>>>
>>>       
>> Yes
>>     
>
> OK - so when we release 1.1, we should yank the deprecated code and
> the translated specs, agree?
>
>   
>>>> As long as we keep deprecated code around and want a translator that
>>>> can translate it we should keep this part of the build around. It
>>>> verifies that translated code still passes.
>>>>
>>>> Aslak
>>>>
>>>>         
>>>>>> To me they look
>>>>>> exactly the same as the regular example suite.
>>>>>> Is the translated specs rake task dead code?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>> Brian
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> 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
>   

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/rspec-devel/attachments/20070820/fff0f672/attachment-0001.html