similar to: Command line changes on trunk (0.9 beta)

Hi all, I released RSpec 0.7.4 yesterday, and by now the gems should have rsync''ed to all the mirrors. This release features a complete redesign of the reports generated with --format html. You can see some examples of it here: http://rspec.rubyforge.org/report.html http://rspec.rubyforge.org/tools/failing_examples.html As usual there are many bug fixes - mostly related to spec/rails.

We''d like to get some feedback on RSpec 0.9 before we start pushing out releases via Rubyforge''s gem server and update the website. We have therefore made the first beta of 0.9 available - both prepackaged and tagged in subversion (see below). RSpec 0.9 introduces a new API for expectations, which essentially means that your underscores go away (there has been other discussions

Recently as a result of using Git I''ve noticed a number of inconsistencies in the RSpec codebase with respect to whitespace (mixed line endings, mixed use of spaces and tabs for indentation, and trailing whitespace at the end of lines). I never would have noticed, but Git produces nice colorized diff output which highlights these kinds of inconsistencies. I wanted to ask if the

The trunk now has some nifty improvements to the HTML report (--format html). Each failing spec will (in addition to the backtrace) have a box with a source code snippet of the offending code. If you have Jamis Buck''s syntax gem installed the code will also be syntax highlighted 8-D There has also been some major improvements to Spec::Ui, and it should be much easier to set up than

I''ve just made a new beta release available that fixes some more bugs to the translator. http://www.nabble.com/ANN:-RSpec-0.9.0-beta-1-available-for-download.-t3526973.html Additional changes since 0.9 beta-1: * Made Spec::Ui *much* easier to install. It will be released separately. Check out trunk/spec_ui/examples * HTML reports now include a syntax highlighted snippet of the source

It looks like the lates NetBeans milestone can run RSpec specifications: http://wiki.netbeans.org/wiki/view/NewAndNoteWorthyMilestone9 I haven''t tried it myself, but if anyone else does please tell us about your experience. Aslak

Behind every great release is a maintenance release. Go get it while it''s hot. We''ve also reworked the website a little - trying to scare off fewer people. Aslak

I''m doing some housekeeping and just realised that the rdoc formatter produces gibberish: http://rspec.rubyforge.org/rdoc/files/EXAMPLES_rd.html Will anyone protest if I just go ahead and remove it? (I can''t imagine anyone using it, especially with the much better HTML formatter) Aslak

I have just committed some changes to the spec command line addressing the following shortcomings: * drb-based spec running (fast-running rails specs) couldn''t be used from spec/rails'' rake tasks or RSpec.tmbundle * coloured or any other standard spec command line options could not be passed to spec/rails'' rake tasks These shortcomings are now history. Options can now

I just released RSpec 0.6.2 Hopefully this fixes the couple of glitches that went into 0.6.1 - the RSpec rake task was heavily refactored in 0.6.1 and didn''t work properly when packaged as a gem. This should be fixed now. Holler if things are still broken. Cheers, Aslak

Hi Aslak, Thanks for the help. That bug is fixed in trunk. Here''s my path to recovery ... $ svn co svn://rubyforge.org/var/svn/rspec/trunk ~/tmp/rspec $ cd ~/tmp/rspec $ rake gem $ sudo gem install pkg/rspec-0.7.3.gem $ ./script/plugin install --force svn://rubyforge.org/var/svn/rspec/trunk/vendor/rspec_on_rails/vendor/plugins/rspec $ ./script/generate rspec (required to regenerate

Hi all, We''re thinking about retiring the test2spec translation tool because it''s becoming a maintenance problem. Is anyone using it? Would anyone miss it if it went away? Aslak

On Thu, Nov 27, 2008 at 4:28 PM, Aslak Helles?y <aslak.hellesoy at gmail.com>wrote: > When (if) this thread ends, let''s start a discussion about indentation > conventions! > Oh... let the pleasure be mine!... and why wait? _EVERYONE_ knows that the only way to indent ruby code is 2 plain spaces. Tabs are known to be the source of all evil and 4 spaces obviously wastes

I''m backed off Edge Rails and all the way back to 0.7.2 of rSpec to make my tests pass. The changes to rSpec are coming together fast and furious and they seem too good to pass up. Is there an approved way to upgrade the components in the absence of prebuilt stuff? Every time I''ve tried, I''ve been punished harshly by the Version Conflict Gods. Just asking for

Hi I just did an update to lates trunk ================= context "Given a generated venue_spec.rb with fixtures loaded" do fixtures :venues specify "fixtures should load two Venues" do Venue.should have(2).records end end ================== gives me ========== 1) TypeError in ''Given a generated venue_spec.rb with fixtures loaded fixtures should load two

Has the should_... syntax changed? I''m getting errors when running the following: should_render(:index) should_be_valid should_not_be_valid should_respond_to should_be should_render I thought the syntax changed to something like the following: obj.should render(:index) but this doesn''t seem to work. Scott

Hi all, How can I use spec fixtures with rails integration tests ? I''ve tried adding {{ fixtures "../../spec/fixtures/myfixture" }} to the integration test but the fixtures are not loaded when I run the rake task. Rails doesn''t load symlinked fixtures either so I copied the files from spec/fixtures for the time being. Not very DRY. Any ideas ? Keith

Is it OK to go ahead and generate a Rails 2.0 project with RSpec 1.0.8? Am I likely to run into problems? Would it be best advised to wait or can I go ahead now? Thanks, Yitzhak -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/rspec-users/attachments/20071212/c6fcea0f/attachment.html

Mocha''s mock/stub framework has the ability to stub all methods on a mock given. Does RSpec''s mocking framework have this ability? And if not, is there some reason it shouldn''t be implemeneted? Regards, Scott

Hey all, I was just wondering if any one has played around with getting autotest''s rspec integration working with rspec''s HTML output. I really like how in the rspec textmate bundle the context of the failing code is inlined with the failing spec along with the exact line highlighted and a link to the exact spot in reference. However, I rarely use this nice output since