On 9/11/07, <b class="gmail_sendername">David Chelimsky</b> <<a href="mailto:dchelimsky@gmail.com">dchelimsky@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<div><span class="gmail_quote"></span><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
On 9/11/07, Geoffrey Wiseman <<a href="mailto:geoffrey.wiseman@gmail.com">geoffrey.wiseman@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>> On 9/9/07, Priit Tamboom <<a href="mailto:priit.tamboom@eesti.ee">priit.tamboom@eesti.ee</a>
> wrote:<br>> > I wonder does anybody planning to go beyond the default html<br>> formatter/report?<br>> ><br>><br>> Two things on that subject came up today, during some RSpec work. It would<br>> be nice if:
<br>><br>> The report contained pending messages, when specified, e.g.:<br>> > describe "Secure passwords with MD5" do<br>><br>> > pending "Waiting on selection of an MD5 library."
<br>><br>> > end<br>> ><br>> The HTML report contains 'Secure passwords with MD5' as pending, but does<br>> not add the explanation as to why.<br>> It would be nice to be able to use DHTML expansion to see the source of the
<br>> spec, sometimes; when we're doing walkthroughs with the customer<br>> representative, it's useful for him to be able to see the source as well as<br>> the descriptions. - Geoffrey<br><br>These are great suggestions. Please, please, please put these in
<br>feature requests where they are guaranteed to stay on the radar and<br>not on this list where they are guaranteed to get lost in the shuffle.<br></blockquote></div><br>Sure; just wasn't sure if the people volunteering to look at the report were likely to use the tracker, but ... I guess as long as they appear in the tracker, that's the main thing, and then regardless of who implements them and when, it's captured.
<br>-- <br>Geoffrey Wiseman<br>