[rspec-users] Using unit_record and rspec (previously "Keeping unit tests from hitting the DB")

David Chelimsky dchelimsky at gmail.com
Sat Oct 20 16:04:33 EDT 2007

On 10/20/07, Tim Heighes <tim at heighes.com> wrote:
> Back in August David Chelimsky wrote:
> "FYI - I tried using the unit_record gem and there are some changes
> required in rspec to make it work, but they are trivial and it works
> great. The only trick is that the prevention of DB access is global
> per process, so you'd have to separate examples that hit the DB from
> those that don't into two separate suites. I'll explore this
> possibility and follow up."
> I've taken a quick look through the latest RDocs and the rspec-devel
> archives but cannot see (maybe through my own stupidity) anything
> that suggests that trunk now supports unit_record out of the box, with
> or without a configuration setting.
> I would very much like to experiment with unit_record but would prefer
> to do so with rspec rather then with test::unit. Not knowing the rspec
> internals myself, please can we have an update on the status or see
> the trivial patch that allows us to try this for ourselves.

This fell off the radar. I just added feature request:

Not the highest priority right now for me, but patches are welcome.


More information about the rspec-users mailing list