From dchelimsky at gmail.com  Fri May  1 00:57:18 2009
From: dchelimsky at gmail.com (David Chelimsky)
Date: Thu, 30 Apr 2009 23:57:18 -0500
Subject: [rspec-devel] [ANN] rspec 1.2.6 Released
Message-ID: <57c63afe0904302157p1e7f9af0j686a61cea0f40bd4@mail.gmail.com>

rspec version 1.2.6 has been released!

Behaviour Driven Development for Ruby.

Changes:

### Version 1.2.6 / 2009-04-30

* bug fixes
  * gem actually built with spec executable

* <http://rspec.info>
* <http://rubyforge.org/projects/rspec>
* <http://github.com/dchelimsky/rspec/wikis>
* <rspec-users at rubyforge.org>
* <rspec-devel at rubyforge.org>

From dchelimsky at gmail.com  Fri May  1 00:57:29 2009
From: dchelimsky at gmail.com (David Chelimsky)
Date: Thu, 30 Apr 2009 23:57:29 -0500
Subject: [rspec-devel] [ANN] rspec-rails 1.2.6 Released
Message-ID: <57c63afe0904302157t3373efabv780526c3633296e3@mail.gmail.com>

rspec-rails version 1.2.6 has been released!

Behaviour Driven Development for Ruby on Rails.

### Version 1.2.6 / 2009-04-30

* bug fixes
  * restored rake tasks for rspec[-rails] as plugins

* <http://rspec.info>
* <http://rubyforge.org/projects/rspec>
* <http://github.com/dchelimsky/rspec-rails>
* <http://wiki.github.com/dchelimsky/rspec/rails>
* <rspec-devel at rubyforge.org>

From dchelimsky at gmail.com  Sun May  3 02:12:04 2009
From: dchelimsky at gmail.com (David Chelimsky)
Date: Sun, 3 May 2009 01:12:04 -0500
Subject: [rspec-devel] this library needs a better name
Message-ID: <57c63afe0905022312h3b7ab125u51fbb84b6c4de225@mail.gmail.com>

Hey guys,

I've got a little lib going named stubble. The name is a bad joke
about stubbing models. I'm looking for a better name.

Here's what it does. Instead of this:

      it "redirects to list of registrations" do
        registration = stub_model(Registration)
        Registration.stub!(:create).and_return(registration)
        registration.stub!(:save!).and_return(true)
        post 'create'
        response.should redirect_to(registrations_path)
      end

You can say this:

      it "redirects to list of registrations" do
        stubble(Registration)
        post 'create'
        response.should redirect_to(registrations_path)
      end

More examples here: http://gist.github.com/105857

The basic idea is that you use the stubble method to define a family
of stubs on a model class and the instance it returns for new(),
find(), create(), and create!(). There's a bit more than that, but
it's an infant right now, and there are certainly going to be holes in
it, but the biggest hole at the moment is its name :)

Thoughts?

Thanks,
David

From dchelimsky at gmail.com  Sun May  3 13:54:38 2009
From: dchelimsky at gmail.com (David Chelimsky)
Date: Sun, 3 May 2009 12:54:38 -0500
Subject: [rspec-devel] this library needs a better name
In-Reply-To: <8d961d900905031040r71d61490l6df79d6e29da9c41@mail.gmail.com>
References: <57c63afe0905022312h3b7ab125u51fbb84b6c4de225@mail.gmail.com>
	<3c30da400905031032p149d54c1y66539d6b1baf1a2b@mail.gmail.com>
	<8d961d900905031040r71d61490l6df79d6e29da9c41@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <57c63afe0905031054o5457169eyecc5088b53fc9ff5@mail.gmail.com>

On Sun, May 3, 2009 at 12:40 PM, aslak hellesoy
<aslak.hellesoy at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> On Sun, May 3, 2009 at 7:32 PM, Mark Wilden <mark at mwilden.com> wrote:
>>
>> On Sat, May 2, 2009 at 11:12 PM, David Chelimsky <dchelimsky at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> The basic idea is that you use the stubble method to define a family
>>> of stubs on a model class and the instance it returns for new(),
>>> find(), create(), and create!(). There's a bit more than that, but
>>> it's an infant right now, and there are certainly going to be holes in
>>> it, but the biggest hole at the moment is its name :)
>>
>> Since the library is for stubbing models, I actually like the name
>> stubble.
>
> Why not include it in rspec-rails?

I may eventually, but I want to prove it out for a bit before adding
it to the mile long list of shit that I have to maintain in rspec
rails to maintain compatibility.

>
> Aslak
>
>>
>> ///ark
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
>

From dchelimsky at gmail.com  Sun May  3 13:57:09 2009
From: dchelimsky at gmail.com (David Chelimsky)
Date: Sun, 3 May 2009 12:57:09 -0500
Subject: [rspec-devel] this library needs a better name
In-Reply-To: <57c63afe0905031054o5457169eyecc5088b53fc9ff5@mail.gmail.com>
References: <57c63afe0905022312h3b7ab125u51fbb84b6c4de225@mail.gmail.com>
	<3c30da400905031032p149d54c1y66539d6b1baf1a2b@mail.gmail.com>
	<8d961d900905031040r71d61490l6df79d6e29da9c41@mail.gmail.com>
	<57c63afe0905031054o5457169eyecc5088b53fc9ff5@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <57c63afe0905031057h782fb98ao86a83541537db717@mail.gmail.com>

On Sun, May 3, 2009 at 12:54 PM, David Chelimsky <dchelimsky at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sun, May 3, 2009 at 12:40 PM, aslak hellesoy
> <aslak.hellesoy at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Sun, May 3, 2009 at 7:32 PM, Mark Wilden <mark at mwilden.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Sat, May 2, 2009 at 11:12 PM, David Chelimsky <dchelimsky at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> The basic idea is that you use the stubble method to define a family
>>>> of stubs on a model class and the instance it returns for new(),
>>>> find(), create(), and create!(). There's a bit more than that, but
>>>> it's an infant right now, and there are certainly going to be holes in
>>>> it, but the biggest hole at the moment is its name :)
>>>
>>> Since the library is for stubbing models, I actually like the name
>>> stubble.
>>
>> Why not include it in rspec-rails?
>
> I may eventually, but I want to prove it out for a bit before adding
> it to the mile long list of shit that I have to maintain in rspec
> rails to maintain compatibility.

Also, a bigger problem than the lib name is the method. This doesn't
speak to me:

stubble(MyModel)

It needs to say "take control of this model class and provide
instances that are savable (or not) for find, new, create, and
create!" - all of that in one word.

Was chatting w/ imajes (James Cox) last night and I mentioned the word
stage, at which point we came up variations of this:

stage(Model).as :savable do |model|
  # access to the one and only model instance
end

Thoughts?


>
>>
>> Aslak
>>
>>>
>>> ///ark
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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
>>
>

From pezlists at gmail.com  Mon May 11 08:34:53 2009
From: pezlists at gmail.com (Perryn Fowler)
Date: Mon, 11 May 2009 22:34:53 +1000
Subject: [rspec-devel] [Cucumber] --must-not-pass option
Message-ID: <1c319b810905110534u6f7dec37k19a17b7b159712bc@mail.gmail.com>

Hi there,

I recently created a fork of Cucumber for use on my current project,
and Aslak asked me to start a discussion here to see if it is
something we would want to merge back into a Cucumber release.

I have attempted to explain the reasoning behind my changes here :
http://www.jroller.com/perryn/entry/bdd_on_a_multi_disciplined

The rake tasks mentioned are really just window dressing for a new
--must-not-pass option that fails the suite if any individual Scenario
passes.

Thoughts?

Pez

-- 
-----------------------
Perryn Fowler
ThoughtWorks

From zach.dennis at gmail.com  Mon May 11 21:07:04 2009
From: zach.dennis at gmail.com (Zach Dennis)
Date: Mon, 11 May 2009 21:07:04 -0400
Subject: [rspec-devel] this library needs a better name
In-Reply-To: <57c63afe0905031057h782fb98ao86a83541537db717@mail.gmail.com>
References: <57c63afe0905022312h3b7ab125u51fbb84b6c4de225@mail.gmail.com>
	<3c30da400905031032p149d54c1y66539d6b1baf1a2b@mail.gmail.com>
	<8d961d900905031040r71d61490l6df79d6e29da9c41@mail.gmail.com>
	<57c63afe0905031054o5457169eyecc5088b53fc9ff5@mail.gmail.com>
	<57c63afe0905031057h782fb98ao86a83541537db717@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <85d99afe0905111807l57694791w379ce1518618dd3a@mail.gmail.com>

On Sun, May 3, 2009 at 1:57 PM, David Chelimsky <dchelimsky at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sun, May 3, 2009 at 12:54 PM, David Chelimsky <dchelimsky at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Sun, May 3, 2009 at 12:40 PM, aslak hellesoy
>> <aslak.hellesoy at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sun, May 3, 2009 at 7:32 PM, Mark Wilden <mark at mwilden.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On Sat, May 2, 2009 at 11:12 PM, David Chelimsky <dchelimsky at gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> The basic idea is that you use the stubble method to define a family
>>>>> of stubs on a model class and the instance it returns for new(),
>>>>> find(), create(), and create!(). There's a bit more than that, but
>>>>> it's an infant right now, and there are certainly going to be holes in
>>>>> it, but the biggest hole at the moment is its name :)
>>>>
>>>> Since the library is for stubbing models, I actually like the name
>>>> stubble.
>>>
>>> Why not include it in rspec-rails?
>>
>> I may eventually, but I want to prove it out for a bit before adding
>> it to the mile long list of shit that I have to maintain in rspec
>> rails to maintain compatibility.
>
> Also, a bigger problem than the lib name is the method. This doesn't
> speak to me:
>
> stubble(MyModel)
>
> It needs to say "take control of this model class and provide
> instances that are savable (or not) for find, new, create, and
> create!" - all of that in one word.

I like "stub_model" for this as well even though its taken.  Based on
the name you pick, you will potentially need to change the name of
"stub_model", otherwise the API is going to become diluted and less
meaningful. Yes, I know it's one method, but stub_model doesn't do
what you think it does and this new behaviour does what I'd think
stub_model would do.

>
> Was chatting w/ imajes (James Cox) last night and I mentioned the word
> stage, at which point we came up variations of this:
>
> stage(Model).as :savable do |model|
> ?# access to the one and only model instance
> end

stage doesn't do it for me. It seems like grasping for straws because
the good names have been taken. In your original post you already gave
two important words... it needs to "stub" stuff on the "model". What
else could be more clear?

>
> Thoughts?

You could keep existing "stub-model" behaviour and add on the new,
until the old is deprecated?

   stub_model(MyModel).as :savable


>
>
>>
>>>
>>> Aslak
>>>
>>>>
>>>> ///ark
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> 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
>



-- 
Zach Dennis
http://www.continuousthinking.com (personal)
http://www.mutuallyhuman.com (hire me)
@zachdennis (twitter)

From dchelimsky at gmail.com  Mon May 11 21:12:19 2009
From: dchelimsky at gmail.com (David Chelimsky)
Date: Mon, 11 May 2009 20:12:19 -0500
Subject: [rspec-devel] this library needs a better name
In-Reply-To: <85d99afe0905111807l57694791w379ce1518618dd3a@mail.gmail.com>
References: <57c63afe0905022312h3b7ab125u51fbb84b6c4de225@mail.gmail.com>
	<3c30da400905031032p149d54c1y66539d6b1baf1a2b@mail.gmail.com>
	<8d961d900905031040r71d61490l6df79d6e29da9c41@mail.gmail.com>
	<57c63afe0905031054o5457169eyecc5088b53fc9ff5@mail.gmail.com>
	<57c63afe0905031057h782fb98ao86a83541537db717@mail.gmail.com>
	<85d99afe0905111807l57694791w379ce1518618dd3a@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <57c63afe0905111812q7a56ba13w40fdf9686f067466@mail.gmail.com>

On Mon, May 11, 2009 at 8:07 PM, Zach Dennis <zach.dennis at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sun, May 3, 2009 at 1:57 PM, David Chelimsky <dchelimsky at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Sun, May 3, 2009 at 12:54 PM, David Chelimsky <dchelimsky at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Sun, May 3, 2009 at 12:40 PM, aslak hellesoy
>>> <aslak.hellesoy at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Sun, May 3, 2009 at 7:32 PM, Mark Wilden <mark at mwilden.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> On Sat, May 2, 2009 at 11:12 PM, David Chelimsky <dchelimsky at gmail.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The basic idea is that you use the stubble method to define a family
>>>>>> of stubs on a model class and the instance it returns for new(),
>>>>>> find(), create(), and create!(). There's a bit more than that, but
>>>>>> it's an infant right now, and there are certainly going to be holes in
>>>>>> it, but the biggest hole at the moment is its name :)
>>>>>
>>>>> Since the library is for stubbing models, I actually like the name
>>>>> stubble.
>>>>
>>>> Why not include it in rspec-rails?
>>>
>>> I may eventually, but I want to prove it out for a bit before adding
>>> it to the mile long list of shit that I have to maintain in rspec
>>> rails to maintain compatibility.
>>
>> Also, a bigger problem than the lib name is the method. This doesn't
>> speak to me:
>>
>> stubble(MyModel)
>>
>> It needs to say "take control of this model class and provide
>> instances that are savable (or not) for find, new, create, and
>> create!" - all of that in one word.
>
> I like "stub_model" for this as well even though its taken. ?Based on
> the name you pick, you will potentially need to change the name of
> "stub_model", otherwise the API is going to become diluted and less
> meaningful. Yes, I know it's one method, but stub_model doesn't do
> what you think it does and this new behaviour does what I'd think
> stub_model would do.
>
>>
>> Was chatting w/ imajes (James Cox) last night and I mentioned the word
>> stage, at which point we came up variations of this:
>>
>> stage(Model).as :savable do |model|
>> ?# access to the one and only model instance
>> end
>
> stage doesn't do it for me. It seems like grasping for straws because
> the good names have been taken. In your original post you already gave
> two important words... it needs to "stub" stuff on the "model". What
> else could be more clear?
>
>>
>> Thoughts?
>
> You could keep existing "stub-model" behaviour and add on the new,
> until the old is deprecated?
>
> ? stub_model(MyModel).as :savable

Hey Zach,

Thanks for your thoughts on this but at this point I've already
announced the library name as stubble and the method it uses is
stubbing:

stubbing(Thing) do |thing|
  get :index
  assigns[:things].should == [thing]
end

More at http://github.com/dchelimsky/stubble/tree/master

Cheers,
David

>
>
>>
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Aslak
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> ///ark
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> 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
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Zach Dennis
> http://www.continuousthinking.com (personal)
> http://www.mutuallyhuman.com (hire me)
> @zachdennis (twitter)
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-devel mailing list
> rspec-devel at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-devel
>

From ben at benmabey.com  Mon May 11 21:49:26 2009
From: ben at benmabey.com (Ben Mabey)
Date: Mon, 11 May 2009 19:49:26 -0600
Subject: [rspec-devel] [Cucumber] --must-not-pass option
In-Reply-To: <8d961d900905111026w20cdc6e6i12fb9f996aaaf727@mail.gmail.com>
References: <1c319b810905110534u6f7dec37k19a17b7b159712bc@mail.gmail.com>
	<8d961d900905111026w20cdc6e6i12fb9f996aaaf727@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4A08D5A6.7040000@benmabey.com>

aslak hellesoy wrote:
>
>     Hi there,
>
>     I recently created a fork of Cucumber for use on my current project,
>     and Aslak asked me to start a discussion here to see if it is
>     something we would want to merge back into a Cucumber release.
>
>     I have attempted to explain the reasoning behind my changes here :
>     http://www.jroller.com/perryn/entry/bdd_on_a_multi_disciplined
>
>     The rake tasks mentioned are really just window dressing for a new
>     --must-not-pass option that fails the suite if any individual Scenario
>     passes.
>
>     Thoughts?
>
>
> Thanks for a well-written blog post that explains the rationale behind 
> it. I especially like the tie-in to WIP, since I'm a huge Kanban fan.
> Let me mull it over for a couple of days.
>
> Would anyone else find this useful?
>
> Aslak

I like it.  I've been using a similar workflow with the tags @proposed 
and @in_progress, and profiles 'proposed', 'in_progress', and 'done'.
I never thought of having the in-progress profile fail if they pass, but 
it makes sense.  So, I really like the idea of having it in Cucumber.

I don't think that the rake tasks should be included in Cucumber, but 
the --must-not-pass option is nice.  However, should we change it to 
"--must-fail"?

-Ben

>  
>
>
>     Pez
>
>     --
>     -----------------------
>     Perryn Fowler
>     ThoughtWorks
>     _______________________________________________
>     rspec-devel mailing list
>     rspec-devel at rubyforge.org <mailto: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


From ben at benmabey.com  Mon May 11 22:57:45 2009
From: ben at benmabey.com (Ben Mabey)
Date: Mon, 11 May 2009 20:57:45 -0600
Subject: [rspec-devel] [Cucumber] --must-not-pass option
In-Reply-To: <4A08D5A6.7040000@benmabey.com>
References: <1c319b810905110534u6f7dec37k19a17b7b159712bc@mail.gmail.com>	<8d961d900905111026w20cdc6e6i12fb9f996aaaf727@mail.gmail.com>
	<4A08D5A6.7040000@benmabey.com>
Message-ID: <4A08E5A9.4000203@benmabey.com>

Ben Mabey wrote:
> aslak hellesoy wrote:
>>
>>     Hi there,
>>
>>     I recently created a fork of Cucumber for use on my current project,
>>     and Aslak asked me to start a discussion here to see if it is
>>     something we would want to merge back into a Cucumber release.
>>
>>     I have attempted to explain the reasoning behind my changes here :
>>     http://www.jroller.com/perryn/entry/bdd_on_a_multi_disciplined
>>
>>     The rake tasks mentioned are really just window dressing for a new
>>     --must-not-pass option that fails the suite if any individual 
>> Scenario
>>     passes.
>>
>>     Thoughts?
>>
>>
>> Thanks for a well-written blog post that explains the rationale 
>> behind it. I especially like the tie-in to WIP, since I'm a huge 
>> Kanban fan.
>> Let me mull it over for a couple of days.
>>
>> Would anyone else find this useful?
>>
>> Aslak
>
> I like it.  I've been using a similar workflow with the tags @proposed 
> and @in_progress, and profiles 'proposed', 'in_progress', and 'done'.
> I never thought of having the in-progress profile fail if they pass, 
> but it makes sense.  So, I really like the idea of having it in Cucumber.
>
> I don't think that the rake tasks should be included in Cucumber, but 
> the --must-not-pass option is nice.  However, should we change it to 
> "--must-fail"?

Actually, now that I think about it maybe "--must-not-pass" is better 
since it could also be pending and be fine.
>
> -Ben
>
>>  
>>
>>
>>     Pez
>>
>>     --
>>     -----------------------
>>     Perryn Fowler
>>     ThoughtWorks
>>     _______________________________________________
>>     rspec-devel mailing list
>>     rspec-devel at rubyforge.org <mailto: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


From pezlists at gmail.com  Tue May 12 02:17:00 2009
From: pezlists at gmail.com (Perryn Fowler)
Date: Tue, 12 May 2009 16:17:00 +1000
Subject: [rspec-devel] [Cucumber] --must-not-pass option
In-Reply-To: <4A08D5A6.7040000@benmabey.com>
References: <1c319b810905110534u6f7dec37k19a17b7b159712bc@mail.gmail.com>
	<8d961d900905111026w20cdc6e6i12fb9f996aaaf727@mail.gmail.com>
	<4A08D5A6.7040000@benmabey.com>
Message-ID: <1c319b810905112317r103499bdh1dd115b528e6de76@mail.gmail.com>

> I don't think that the rake tasks should be included in Cucumber, but the
> --must-not-pass option is nice.

Yeah, I mainly included them and their tests and features as a kind of
documentation in the code base for why --must-not-pass exists.

I found it difficult to explain why on earth I would want that option
without talking about my need for in_progress and regression builds,
so I added them as an explicit use case.

perhaps it would have been better to stick with the blog

Pez

From pezlists at gmail.com  Tue May 12 23:34:40 2009
From: pezlists at gmail.com (Perryn Fowler)
Date: Wed, 13 May 2009 13:34:40 +1000
Subject: [rspec-devel] [Cucumber] --must-not-pass option
In-Reply-To: <8d961d900905120021t6906b1a4ke94b919ecffb51f6@mail.gmail.com>
References: <1c319b810905110534u6f7dec37k19a17b7b159712bc@mail.gmail.com>
	<8d961d900905111026w20cdc6e6i12fb9f996aaaf727@mail.gmail.com>
	<4A08D5A6.7040000@benmabey.com>
	<1c319b810905112317r103499bdh1dd115b528e6de76@mail.gmail.com>
	<8d961d900905120021t6906b1a4ke94b919ecffb51f6@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <1c319b810905122034o4f79e82amdcc13ca64ae22b90@mail.gmail.com>

> Personally I would love to name the switch --work-in-progress or --wip (-w)
> The help text would explain the failure logic.
>
> I think this name would be more educational too.
>
> WDYT?

Yeah, I like that. I'll change it and remove the rake tasks on my fork
then send you another pull request



-- 
-----------------------
Perryn Fowler
ThoughtWorks

From aslak.hellesoy at gmail.com  Thu May 14 08:17:37 2009
From: aslak.hellesoy at gmail.com (aslak hellesoy)
Date: Thu, 14 May 2009 14:17:37 +0200
Subject: [rspec-devel] [Cucumber] --must-not-pass option
In-Reply-To: <1c319b810905122034o4f79e82amdcc13ca64ae22b90@mail.gmail.com>
References: <1c319b810905110534u6f7dec37k19a17b7b159712bc@mail.gmail.com>
	<8d961d900905111026w20cdc6e6i12fb9f996aaaf727@mail.gmail.com>
	<4A08D5A6.7040000@benmabey.com>
	<1c319b810905112317r103499bdh1dd115b528e6de76@mail.gmail.com>
	<8d961d900905120021t6906b1a4ke94b919ecffb51f6@mail.gmail.com>
	<1c319b810905122034o4f79e82amdcc13ca64ae22b90@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <8d961d900905140517h5b9a667agcbee1e5e065ffca@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, May 13, 2009 at 5:34 AM, Perryn Fowler <pezlists at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Personally I would love to name the switch --work-in-progress or --wip (-w)
>> The help text would explain the failure logic.
>>
>> I think this name would be more educational too.
>>
>> WDYT?
>
> Yeah, I like that. I'll change it and remove the rake tasks on my fork
> then send you another pull request
>

I have done a diff on your master branch - from the commit prior to
your first commit up to your last one.

github pull perryn
git checkout perryn/master
git diff bc51edfa5..849634ca

The diff is here:

http://gist.github.com/111636

This is a fairly substantial diff (1300+ lines), and I can't just
merge that in. It changes a lot more than it needs to in order to
implement this fairly simple feature (--must-not-pass/--wip).

Things I believe should be in a separate branch/diff:

* Rake task (ref Ben's comment)
* Mucking with the backtrace formatting
* Random whitespace

Could you please create a new branch (from my current master) and
implement *only* the --wip option? Then I'll pull it in.

Cheers,
Aslak

>
>
> --
> -----------------------
> Perryn Fowler
> ThoughtWorks
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-devel mailing list
> rspec-devel at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-devel
>

From luislavena at gmail.com  Mon May 18 08:26:48 2009
From: luislavena at gmail.com (Luis Lavena)
Date: Mon, 18 May 2009 09:26:48 -0300
Subject: [rspec-devel] Building Cucumber for Java on Windows
In-Reply-To: <a12eb6810905180050x2c8b1572x3bd6c0afda073571@mail.gmail.com>
References: <a12eb6810905180050x2c8b1572x3bd6c0afda073571@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <71166b3b0905180526r896c216tec931a6a1e26a08f@mail.gmail.com>

2009/5/18 Trond Marius ?vstetun <trond at ovstetun.no>:
> Hi.
>
> I am having problems running the rake tasks for Cucumber for Java on
> Windows.
> When I run "jruby -S rake gem" in Cygwin I get the following stack:
>

The first thing is that you're running JRuby inside Cygwin. all batch
file calls will be intercepted by cygwin and not by the OS, thus
failing...

> [...]
> mvn clean package
> /usr/bin/sh: call: command not found
> rake aborted!

"call" is an internal command of Windows interpreter, that should have
work on a plain console.
>
> When I run in the regular cmd-shell:
> C:\Users\ovstetun\Mesan\fagArbeid\cucumber_java\cucumber-java>jruby -S rake
> gem --trace
> (in C:/Users/ovstetun/Mesan/fagArbeid/cucumber_java/cucumber-java)
> [...]
>
>
> Are these known problems? Anything to fix?
> So far I have changed the rake-tasks the following:
> task :jar do
> ? # sh 'mvn clean package'
> ? mv "target/cucumber-java-#{Cucumber::Java::VERSION::STRING}.jar", 'lib'
> end
>
> Then things work as long as I remember to run mvn package between each
> execution of rake gem..
> Any tips to making this work?
>

Can you upgrade to rake 0.8.7? There are known problems of
Kernel::system() on Windows that got fixed several versions after
0.8.4. Also, latest 0.8.7 fixed issues when calling shell commands
form JRuby.

gem update rake

HTH,
-- 
Luis Lavena
AREA 17
-
Perfection in design is achieved not when there is nothing more to add,
but rather when there is nothing more to take away.
Antoine de Saint-Exup?ry

From aslak.hellesoy at gmail.com  Mon May 18 14:12:03 2009
From: aslak.hellesoy at gmail.com (aslak hellesoy)
Date: Mon, 18 May 2009 20:12:03 +0200
Subject: [rspec-devel] [Cucumber] ANN: New Google Group for Cucumber
Message-ID: <8d961d900905181112i66878548rfff8e2794326cc6b@mail.gmail.com>

David Chelimsky and I have decided that it's now best to create a
separate mailing list for Cucumber.
The RSpec mailing lists remain the same, but we're hoping that you
will all move Cucumber related discussions to this new list.
I have already sent an invitation to the 98 people who have provided
patches to Cucumber (taken from the Git log). Others can subscribe
manually.

See you at http://groups.google.com/group/cukes

Cheers,
Aslak