[rspec-users] Deprecating the mocking framework?

Christoph Sturm christoph.sturm at gmail.com
Wed Sep 5 08:39:28 EDT 2007

everybody in this thread is reacting like you are about to remove the
built in mocking. The idea was to deprecate it, something like

"if you use the build in mocking right now, fine. If you start a new
project dont use it"

One thing is clear, mocha is much nicer than the integrated mocking,
nicer syntax, better errormessages, better everything. The rspec
mocking framework could never compete with mocha or flexmock on its
own. At the time it was created there were good reasons for that, just
like there are good reasons to deprecate it now.

No one should be forced to migrate an old project over to new mocks,
but thats not what we are talking about.

Maybe you should just keep the built in mocking, but recommend mocha
for new projects, and start using mocha for the samples and generated

I recognize that some people like flexmock better, but having one
recommended framework would make it much easier for people to get
started. (It will almost feel like mocha was built in :P)

It really feels strange to hear these complains about rspec not having
everything built in, because the main complain for me and others about
rspec was always that its too big and has its own mocking that you
have to use. (This is fixed now and rspec plays very nice with mocha,

On 9/3/07, David Chelimsky <dchelimsky at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi all,
> I've talked this over w/ a couple of the other committers and we've
> decided that we will NOT be deprecating the mock framework, at least
> for the foreseeable future. If/when we do, it will happen with plenty
> of notice and a clear, painless (as much as is possible) upgrade path.
> To be clear: this decision is purely pragmatic. Benefits of the
> existing framework cited in this thread are significant (one-stop
> shop, generated specs for the rails plugin, etc). And the amount of
> work it would take to do it right (backwards compatibility, easy
> upgrade path, support for multiple external frameworks, etc) far
> exceeds the perceived cost of maintaining the existing framework.
> Cheers,
> David
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users

christoph.sturm at gmail.com

More information about the rspec-users mailing list