Issue #6875 has been reported by kou (Kouhei Sutou). ---------------------------------------- Feature #6875: Make test/unit default gem https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/6875 Author: kou (Kouhei Sutou) Status: Open Priority: Normal Assignee: sorah (Shota Fukumori) Category: lib Target version: 2.0.0 test/unitをdefault gemにするパッチです。 ((<StdlibGem>))に従ってバージョンは2.0.0.0にしています。 私はtest-unitというgemを作っています。test-unit gemがインストールされるとバンドルされているtest/unitよりも優先してtest-unit gemの方が使われると嬉しいのでこのパッチを書きました。
on 2012-08-15 14:07
on 2012-08-15 14:09
Issue #6875 has been updated by kou (Kouhei Sutou). Description updated ---------------------------------------- Feature #6875: Make test/unit default gem https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/6875#change-28892 Author: kou (Kouhei Sutou) Status: Open Priority: Normal Assignee: sorah (Shota Fukumori) Category: lib Target version: 2.0.0 test/unitをdefault gemにするパッチです。 http://bugs.ruby-lang.org/projects/ruby/wiki/StdlibGem に従ってバージョンは2.0.0.0にしています。 私はtest-unitというgemを作っています。test-unit gemがインストールされるとバンドルされているtest/unitよりも優先してtest-unit gemの方が使われると嬉しいのでこのパッチを書きました。
on 2012-08-16 14:09
Issue #6875 has been updated by naruse (Yui NARUSE). それでtest-allがきちんと完走するならわたしは異論無いんですが、どうなんでしょう。 test-all用に別名を与えたほうがいいのかしらん。 ---------------------------------------- Feature #6875: Make test/unit default gem https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/6875#change-28911 Author: kou (Kouhei Sutou) Status: Open Priority: Normal Assignee: sorah (Shota Fukumori) Category: lib Target version: 2.0.0 test/unitをdefault gemにするパッチです。 http://bugs.ruby-lang.org/projects/ruby/wiki/StdlibGem に従ってバージョンは2.0.0.0にしています。 私はtest-unitというgemを作っています。test-unit gemがインストールされるとバンドルされているtest/unitよりも優先してtest-unit gemの方が使われると嬉しいのでこのパッチを書きました。
on 2012-08-16 15:42
Issue #6875 has been updated by kou (Kouhei Sutou). あぁ、すみません、説明が足りませんでした。。。 Ruby本体のテストにtest-unit gemを使いたいという話ではなく、Rubyをインストールしたユーザーがgem install test-unitとすればrequire "test/unit"でtest-unit gemが使えるようになってほしいということです。 ---------------------------------------- Feature #6875: Make test/unit default gem https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/6875#change-28912 Author: kou (Kouhei Sutou) Status: Open Priority: Normal Assignee: sorah (Shota Fukumori) Category: lib Target version: 2.0.0 test/unitをdefault gemにするパッチです。 http://bugs.ruby-lang.org/projects/ruby/wiki/StdlibGem に従ってバージョンは2.0.0.0にしています。 私はtest-unitというgemを作っています。test-unit gemがインストールされるとバンドルされているtest/unitよりも優先してtest-unit gemの方が使われると嬉しいのでこのパッチを書きました。
on 2012-08-17 03:23
$B$3$s$K$A$O!"$J$+$`$i(B($B$&(B)$B$G$9!#(B
In message "[ruby-dev:46056] [ruby-trunk - Feature #6875] Make test/unit
default gem"
on Aug.16,2012 21:08:38, <naruse@airemix.jp> wrote:
>
$B$=$l$G(Btest-all$B$,$-$A$s$H40Av$9$k$J$i$o$?$7$O0[O@L5$$$s$G$9$,!"$I$&$J$s$G$7$g$&!#(B
test-all$B$O(B--disable-gems$B$GAv$k$N$G1F6A$O$J$$(B...$B$H;W$$$^$9!#(B
> test-all$BMQ$KJLL>$rM?$($?$[$&$,$$$$$N$+$7$i$s!#(B
test/unit$B$H$$$&L>A0$O?\F#$5$s$NE[$,K\J*$J$N$G!"%Q%A$b$s$G$"$k(B
ruby$B%P%s%I%kB&$,L>A0$rJQ$($k$N$,6Z$H$$$&5$$O$7$J$$$G$b$"$j$^(B
$B$;$s!#(B
$B$,!"9M$($J$$$H$$$1$J$$$3$H$,B?$/$FFq$7$$$G$9$M!#(B
($B7kO@$J$7(B)
$B$=$l$G$O!#(B
on 2012-08-27 14:01
Issue #6875 has been updated by kou (Kouhei Sutou). 手元では↓のようにパスしました。私がコミットすればよいですか？他にまだ何か確認しますか？ # Running tests: [ 9418/11373] TestRubyMode::TestIndent#test_singleton_class = 0.00 s 1) Skipped: test_singleton_class(TestRubyMode::TestIndent) [/home/kou/work/ruby/ruby/test/misc/test_ruby_mode.rb:108]: pending Finished tests in 413.081272s, 27.5321 tests/s, 5482.1125 assertions/s. 11373 tests, 2264558 assertions, 0 failures, 0 errors, 29 skips ruby -v: ruby 2.0.0dev (2012-08-22 trunk 36709) [x86_64-linux] ---------------------------------------- Feature #6875: Make test/unit default gem https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/6875#change-28968 Author: kou (Kouhei Sutou) Status: Open Priority: Normal Assignee: sorah (Shota Fukumori) Category: lib Target version: 2.0.0 test/unitをdefault gemにするパッチです。 http://bugs.ruby-lang.org/projects/ruby/wiki/StdlibGem に従ってバージョンは2.0.0.0にしています。 私はtest-unitというgemを作っています。test-unit gemがインストールされるとバンドルされているtest/unitよりも優先してtest-unit gemの方が使われると嬉しいのでこのパッチを書きました。
on 2012-08-27 14:01
Issue #6875 has been updated by sorah (Shota Fukumori). test-all が通って、特にほかに問題がなければ入れちゃって良いと思います ---------------------------------------- Feature #6875: Make test/unit default gem https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/6875#change-28962 Author: kou (Kouhei Sutou) Status: Open Priority: Normal Assignee: sorah (Shota Fukumori) Category: lib Target version: 2.0.0 test/unitをdefault gemにするパッチです。 http://bugs.ruby-lang.org/projects/ruby/wiki/StdlibGem に従ってバージョンは2.0.0.0にしています。 私はtest-unitというgemを作っています。test-unit gemがインストールされるとバンドルされているtest/unitよりも優先してtest-unit gemの方が使われると嬉しいのでこのパッチを書きました。
on 2012-10-18 09:10
Issue #6875 has been updated by vo.x (Vit Ondruch). Hi guys, Could you please enlighten what this issue solves? Adding .gemspec is not enough to create valid gem. The gem typically consist from following properties: 1) The /usr/bin stub allow to load specified version of gem, e.g. calling $ testrb _2.5.2_ should call the latest version of test-unit but your stub does not do so 2) The gem usually contains code. It does not depend on some code lying somewhere in the StdLib 3) The gem could be usually found on rubygems.org. While there is test-unit available on rubygems.org, it is definitely different test-unit then the one shipped with Ruby. Could you please stop confusing Ruby users and stop to make life harder to us, packagers? I really love to have rubygem-test-unit in Fedora which is well defined and I'd really love to be able to break StdLib into independent rubygems, which can be packaged separately and updated separately, but this is not the way. Could you please reconsider your steps? Thank you. ---------------------------------------- Feature #6875: Make test/unit default gem https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/6875#change-30993 Author: kou (Kouhei Sutou) Status: Closed Priority: Normal Assignee: sorah (Shota Fukumori) Category: lib Target version: 2.0.0 test/unitをdefault gemにするパッチです。 http://bugs.ruby-lang.org/projects/ruby/wiki/StdlibGem に従ってバージョンは2.0.0.0にしています。 私はtest-unitというgemを作っています。test-unit gemがインストールされるとバンドルされているtest/unitよりも優先してtest-unit gemの方が使われると嬉しいのでこのパッチを書きました。
on 2012-10-20 09:46
# https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/6875 $B$+$iEj9F$7$h$&$H$9(B # $B$k$H(BInternal Server Error$B$K$J$k$N$G%a!<%k$GAw$j$^$9!#(B # $B$3$l$G$b(BRedmine$B$KEPO?$5$l$k$s$G$9$h$M!#(B I'm the test-unit gem maintainer and working on default gem for RubyGems library. I want to make Ruby users (especially test-unit gem users) life easier. > Could you please enlighten what this issue solves? OK. I'll describe it. Here is a problem that I want to solve by this issue: test_xxx.rb: require "test/unit" class TestXXX < Test::Unit::TestCase def test_xxx assert_equal(3, 1 + 2) end end test_xxx_with_explicit_gem_test-unit.rb: gem "test-unit" require "./test_xxx" Current: % ruby test_xxx.rb # -> uses test/unit in StdLib % gem install test-unit % ruby test_xxx.rb # -> still uses test/unit in StdLib % ruby test_xxx_with_explicit_gem_test-unit.rb # -> uses test-unit gem Expected: % ruby test_xxx.rb # -> uses test/unit in StdLib (same) % gem install test-unit % ruby test_xxx.rb # -> still uses test/unit in StdLib (different) % ruby test_xxx_with_explicit_gem_test-unit.rb # -> uses test-unit gem (same) > Adding .gemspec is not enough to create valid gem. It is right. There are still some tasks to implement default gem feature. > 1) The /usr/bin stub allow to load specified version of gem, e.g. calling $ testrb _2.5.2_ should call the latest version of test-unit but your stub does not do so It is right. But it doesn't cause the problem in testrb case. Because test-unit gem dropped testrb to avoid conflicting testrb that is installed by Ruby. (It is not needed soon. I will implement the feature later.) > 2) The gem usually contains code. It does not depend on some code lying somewhere in the StdLib It is right. (.gemspec for test/unit StdLib doesn't have any problems for it, doesn't it?) > 3) The gem could be usually found on rubygems.org. While there is test-unit available on rubygems.org, it is definitely different test-unit then the one shipped with Ruby. It is right. (.gemspec for test/unit StdLib doesn't have any problems for it, doesn't it?) > Could you please stop confusing Ruby users and stop to make life harder to us, packagers? I don't want to confusing Ruby users and make life harder to packages. If they have problems, I want to resolve them. > I'd really love to be able to break StdLib into independent rubygems The "rubygems" means that gem packages on RubyGems.org not RubyGems library itself, doesn't it? If it is true, the change doesn't depend on additional gem packages. > can be packaged separately and updated separately, but this is not the way. You can do both of them. You just put test-unit.gemspec to Ruby's package. It doesn't add any additional dependencies. RubyGems library does all other works. (It is work in progress. https://github.com/rubygems/rubygems/pull/377 ) Again, I want to implement default gem feature *without* bothering packagers. I don't know packagers' tasks well. Could you please tell me your problems? I'll resolve them. Thanks.
on 2012-10-24 13:23
Issue #6875 has been updated by vo.x (Vit Ondruch). kou (Kouhei Sutou) wrote: > # https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/6875 から投稿しようとす > # るとInternal Server Errorになるのでメールで送ります。 > # これでもRedmineに登録されるんですよね。 > > I'm the test-unit gem maintainer and working on default gem for RubyGems library. > I want to make Ruby users (especially test-unit gem users) life easier. Thank you. I appreciate your effort. > class TestXXX < Test::Unit::TestCase > Current: > % gem install test-unit > % ruby test_xxx.rb # -> still uses test/unit in StdLib (different) > % ruby test_xxx_with_explicit_gem_test-unit.rb # -> uses test-unit gem (same) Sorry, I am not sure I understand this example. I expect that current is Ruby 1.9.3 and expected is Ruby 2.0, but what is the difference? > > Adding .gemspec is not enough to create valid gem. > > It is right. There are still some tasks to implement default gem feature. > > > 1) The /usr/bin stub allow to load specified version of gem, e.g. calling $ testrb _2.5.2_ should call the latest version of test-unit but your stub does not do so > > It is right. But it doesn't cause the problem in testrb case. Because test-unit gem dropped testrb to avoid conflicting testrb that is installed by Ruby. > > (It is not needed soon. I will implement the feature later.) Good to know. Thank you. > > 2) The gem usually contains code. It does not depend on some code lying somewhere in the StdLib > > It is right. (.gemspec for test/unit StdLib doesn't have any problems for it, doesn't it?) StdLib doesn't, but I cannot package such gem, because it is not gem. > > 3) The gem could be usually found on rubygems.org. While there is test-unit available on rubygems.org, it is definitely different test-unit then the one shipped with Ruby. > > It is right. (.gemspec for test/unit StdLib doesn't have any problems for it, doesn't it?) It is not problem for StdLib, but how should I package something I don't have source for? > > Could you please stop confusing Ruby users and stop to make life harder to us, packagers? > > I don't want to confusing Ruby users and make life harder to packages. If they have problems, I want to resolve them. Thank you. I appreciate your effort. > > I'd really love to be able to break StdLib into independent rubygems > > The "rubygems" means that gem packages on RubyGems.org not RubyGems library itself, doesn't it? > If it is true, the change doesn't depend on additional gem packages. No I really mean that StdLib should consist from real gems. Since we need them for packaging and easy updates. > > can be packaged separately and updated separately, but this is not the way. > > You can do both of them. > You just put test-unit.gemspec to Ruby's package. It doesn't add any additional dependencies. > RubyGems library does all other works. (It is work in progress. https://github.com/rubygems/rubygems/pull/377 ) > > Again, I want to implement default gem feature *without* bothering packagers. > I don't know packagers' tasks well. Could you please tell me your problems? I'll resolve them. > > Thanks. Thank you for your effort. I'll try to elaborate a bit. In Fedora, we unbundled every gem from StdLib, i.e. the rake is not anymore part of StdLib. There is no reason to have it in StdLib, since we need only one version of Rake on system. That is the purpose of RPM and YUM, to manage your packages. It allows easy updates when new rake version is available as well as it prevents multiple copies around the system. No for your 'gem', since there is no test-unit, just some test-unit shim, there is no way how to extract it from StdLib. We are already providing in Fedora full featured rubygem-test-unit, but how it is supposed the original part of StdLib? For the rest, see my feedback in your pull request and thank you for pointing it out, since I am obviously highly interested in possible output. ---------------------------------------- Feature #6875: Make test/unit default gem https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/6875#change-31469 Author: kou (Kouhei Sutou) Status: Closed Priority: Normal Assignee: sorah (Shota Fukumori) Category: lib Target version: 2.0.0 test/unitをdefault gemにするパッチです。 http://bugs.ruby-lang.org/projects/ruby/wiki/StdlibGem に従ってバージョンは2.0.0.0にしています。 私はtest-unitというgemを作っています。test-unit gemがインストールされるとバンドルされているtest/unitよりも優先してtest-unit gemの方が使われると嬉しいのでこのパッチを書きました。
on 2012-10-26 15:12
Issue #6875 has been updated by kou (Kouhei Sutou). I comment on this issue. I think that this issue is the right issue for talking about only test-unit.gemspec. If you want to talk about "default gem", #5481 is the right issue. If the latter is true, please use #5481. vo.x (Vit Ondruch) wrote: > kou (Kouhei Sutou) wrote: > Sorry, I am not sure I understand this example. I expect that current is Ruby 1.9.3 and expected is Ruby 2.0, but what is the difference? Sorry. Here is a correct example: test_xxx.rb: require "test/unit" class TestXXX < Test::Unit::TestCase def test_xxx assert_equal(3, 1 + 2) end end test_xxx_with_explicit_gem_test-unit.rb: gem "test-unit" require "./test_xxx" Current: % ruby test_xxx.rb # -> uses test/unit in StdLib % gem install test-unit % ruby test_xxx.rb # -> still uses test/unit in StdLib % ruby test_xxx_with_explicit_gem_test-unit.rb # -> uses test-unit gem Expected: % ruby test_xxx.rb # -> uses test/unit in StdLib (same) % gem install test-unit % ruby test_xxx.rb # -> uses test-unit gem (different) % ruby test_xxx_with_explicit_gem_test-unit.rb # -> uses test-unit gem (same) > > > 2) The gem usually contains code. It does not depend on some code lying somewhere in the StdLib > > > > It is right. (.gemspec for test/unit StdLib doesn't have any problems for it, doesn't it?) > > StdLib doesn't, but I cannot package such gem, because it is not gem. You doesn't need to package it. It should be included in Ruby's package itself. > > > 3) The gem could be usually found on rubygems.org. While there is test-unit available on rubygems.org, it is definitely different test-unit then the one shipped with Ruby. > > > > It is right. (.gemspec for test/unit StdLib doesn't have any problems for it, doesn't it?) > > It is not problem for StdLib, but how should I package something I don't have source for? You doesn't need to package it. It should be included in Ruby's package itself because the source is included in Ruby. > > > I'd really love to be able to break StdLib into independent rubygems > > > > The "rubygems" means that gem packages on RubyGems.org not RubyGems library itself, doesn't it? > > If it is true, the change doesn't depend on additional gem packages. > > No I really mean that StdLib should consist from real gems. Since we need them for packaging and easy updates. I don't think that "packaging as RPM" equal to "easy updates". For example, users can update by "gem update". It is also easy update. > In Fedora, we unbundled every gem from StdLib, i.e. the rake is not anymore part of StdLib. There is no reason to have it in StdLib, since we need only one version of Rake on system. There is a reason. We can use rake with "ruby -disable-gems" if rake is part of StdLib. See also https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/projects/ruby/wiki/StdlibGem#ToDo . The page describes advantages and drawbacks. Why "we need only one version of Rake on system"? Is it only for Rake or all libraries/softwares on Fedora? Fedora has python and python3 packages. Is it not related about "we need only one version of Rake on system"? It seems that some (or many) Rails users have one or more Rails versions on system. So I don't understand "we need only one version of Rake on system". > That is the purpose of RPM and YUM, to manage your packages. It allows easy updates when new rake version is available as well as it prevents multiple copies around the system. Does "multiple copies" means "rake 0.9.2 and rake 0.9.2.2 are on the same system"? I don't think that it is not "multiple copies"... > No for your 'gem', since there is no test-unit, just some test-unit shim, there is no way how to extract it from StdLib. We are already providing in Fedora full featured rubygem-test-unit, but how it is supposed the original part of StdLib? I will not extract it from StdLib. > For the rest, see my feedback in your pull request and thank you for pointing it out, since I am obviously highly interested in possible output. Thanks for your feedback. ---------------------------------------- Feature #6875: Make test/unit default gem https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/6875#change-31610 Author: kou (Kouhei Sutou) Status: Closed Priority: Normal Assignee: sorah (Shota Fukumori) Category: lib Target version: 2.0.0 test/unitをdefault gemにするパッチです。 http://bugs.ruby-lang.org/projects/ruby/wiki/StdlibGem に従ってバージョンは2.0.0.0にしています。 私はtest-unitというgemを作っています。test-unit gemがインストールされるとバンドルされているtest/unitよりも優先してtest-unit gemの方が使われると嬉しいのでこのパッチを書きました。
on 2012-10-30 15:27
Issue #6875 has been updated by vo.x (Vit Ondruch). kou (Kouhei Sutou) wrote: > I comment on this issue. > I think that this issue is the right issue for talking about only test-unit.gemspec. If you want to talk about "default gem", #5481 is the right issue. If the latter is true, please use #5481. Well, yes, it would be probably better to discuss some points there :) > require "test/unit" > require "./test_xxx" > > % ruby test_xxx.rb # -> uses test/unit in StdLib (same) > % gem install test-unit > % ruby test_xxx.rb # -> uses test-unit gem (different) > % ruby test_xxx_with_explicit_gem_test-unit.rb # -> uses test-unit gem (same) Yes, that make sense. Actually it is one issues I complained in #6124 > > > > 2) The gem usually contains code. It does not depend on some code lying somewhere in the StdLib > > > > > > It is right. (.gemspec for test/unit StdLib doesn't have any problems for it, doesn't it?) > > > > StdLib doesn't, but I cannot package such gem, because it is not gem. > > You doesn't need to package it. It should be included in Ruby's package itself. No, that is not true. Not on Fedora and similar guidelines apply to other distributions as well: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guideline... https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Treatment... https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:No_Bundle... Actually, see also some comments from Lucas Nussbaum, who has the same interest as me, just for Debian. > > > The "rubygems" means that gem packages on RubyGems.org not RubyGems library itself, doesn't it? > > > If it is true, the change doesn't depend on additional gem packages. > > > > No I really mean that StdLib should consist from real gems. Since we need them for packaging and easy updates. > > I don't think that "packaging as RPM" equal to "easy updates". For example, users can update by "gem update". It is also easy update. You have a view of Ruby developer. Ruby developer is used to use gem command. But I am defending interest of Fedora users. They don't really care about gems, they just want to have their application working and they want to use system tools to install the application. And in Fedora, that is RPM/YUM. > > > In Fedora, we unbundled every gem from StdLib, i.e. the rake is not anymore part of StdLib. There is no reason to have it in StdLib, since we need only one version of Rake on system. > > There is a reason. We can use rake with "ruby -disable-gems" if rake is part of StdLib. > See also https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/projects/ruby/wiki/StdlibGem#ToDo . The page describes advantages and drawbacks. Yes, you chosen the option 2, while only the option 1 is the correct approach. What would be the purpose of --disable-gems flag, if you load gems? If you are using --disable-gems, it is probably for some reason. If you are using such flag, you should know what are you doing and since it is not that easy to find it in documentation, you have to be definitely more experienced Rubyist. > > Why "we need only one version of Rake on system"? Is it only for Rake or all libraries/softwares on Fedora? Why would you need more versions of Rake? If it is ensured that all the applications are compatible with the Rake, why would I want to have more Rakes on my system? How many versions of Rake do you have on your system? It applies of course to every library/application. > Fedora has python and python3 packages. Is it not related about "we need only one version of Rake on system"? Yes, this is unfortunate exception and you would be able to find more. But anyway, the ultimate target is to have only one library/application. > It seems that some (or many) Rails users have one or more Rails versions on system. So I don't understand "we need only one version of Rake on system". Here you are again speaking about Rails developers, not users. Users don't care about Rails, but about Redmine or Aeolus, which are build using Rails. > > That is the purpose of RPM and YUM, to manage your packages. It allows easy updates when new rake version is available as well as it prevents multiple copies around the system. > > Does "multiple copies" means "rake 0.9.2 and rake 0.9.2.2 are on the same system"? > I don't think that it is not "multiple copies"... Yes, this is what I mean by multiple copies. > > No for your 'gem', since there is no test-unit, just some test-unit shim, there is no way how to extract it from StdLib. We are already providing in Fedora full featured rubygem-test-unit, but how it is supposed the original part of StdLib? > > I will not extract it from StdLib. Yes, because there is nothing to extract. That is the point. In Ruby, there is currently Minitest and test-unit, which is actually not test unit. If there would be something to extract into gem, I would already did it for Fedora. ---------------------------------------- Feature #6875: Make test/unit default gem https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/6875#change-31998 Author: kou (Kouhei Sutou) Status: Closed Priority: Normal Assignee: sorah (Shota Fukumori) Category: lib Target version: 2.0.0 test/unitをdefault gemにするパッチです。 http://bugs.ruby-lang.org/projects/ruby/wiki/StdlibGem に従ってバージョンは2.0.0.0にしています。 私はtest-unitというgemを作っています。test-unit gemがインストールされるとバンドルされているtest/unitよりも優先してtest-unit gemの方が使われると嬉しいのでこのパッチを書きました。
on 2012-11-20 15:00
Issue #6875 has been updated by kou (Kouhei Sutou). Sorry for my late response... vo.x (Vit Ondruch) wrote: > kou (Kouhei Sutou) wrote: > > I comment on this issue. > > I think that this issue is the right issue for talking about only test-unit.gemspec. If you want to talk about "default gem", #5481 is the right issue. If the latter is true, please use #5481. > > Well, yes, it would be probably better to discuss some points there :) Thanks for your agreement. I'll comment on only test-unit.gemspec things. > You have a view of Ruby developer. Ruby developer is used to use gem command. But I am defending interest of Fedora users. They don't really care about gems, they just want to have their application working and they want to use system tools to install the application. And in Fedora, that is RPM/YUM. I understand. You're right. I have a view of Ruby developer. (I understand that "Ruby developer" means developers who use Ruby for programming. It doesn't mean that developers who develope Ruby itself.) I misunderstood that Fedora users are both Ruby developers and users that use applications that written by Ruby. > > > No for your 'gem', since there is no test-unit, just some test-unit shim, there is no way how to extract it from StdLib. We are already providing in Fedora full featured rubygem-test-unit, but how it is supposed the original part of StdLib? > > > > I will not extract it from StdLib. > > Yes, because there is nothing to extract. That is the point. In Ruby, there is currently Minitest and test-unit, which is actually not test unit. If there would be something to extract into gem, I would already did it for Fedora. OK. I understand that test/unit in the Ruby package needs to do nothing. I hope that NaHi comments on #5481... It seems that he thought about it in RubyConf. He tweets summary on twitter: https://twitter.com/nahi/status/264807829527986176 .@drbrain imports RubyGems 2.0 w/ @ktou's fakegem fix (default gem) into CRuby 2.0.0. And we help @hone02 for bundler compat. /cc @evanphx https://twitter.com/nahi/status/264808442626179072 @nahi And real fix (install stdlib as a real gem) would come after 2.0. @drbrain @ktou @hone02 Thanks for discussing! /cc @evanphx I hope that he describes about details of it on #5481... ---------------------------------------- Feature #6875: Make test/unit default gem https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/6875#change-33311 Author: kou (Kouhei Sutou) Status: Closed Priority: Normal Assignee: sorah (Shota Fukumori) Category: lib Target version: 2.0.0 test/unitをdefault gemにするパッチです。 http://bugs.ruby-lang.org/projects/ruby/wiki/StdlibGem に従ってバージョンは2.0.0.0にしています。 私はtest-unitというgemを作っています。test-unit gemがインストールされるとバンドルされているtest/unitよりも優先してtest-unit gemの方が使われると嬉しいのでこのパッチを書きました。
on 2012-11-22 02:54
Issue #6875 has been updated by lancel (lancel lancel). =begin All of us have read the stories of excite people's ((<lancel|URL:http://www.lancel1.com/>)) mind, the hero of the story to live only for a very limited time, sometimes up to a year, sometimes as short as one day. But we always want to know, the doomed choose how to spend their ((<sac lancel|URL:http://www.lancel1.com/>)) last days. Of course, I say is of free men who have a choice, not whose sphere of activities is strictly.458gyu854 =end ---------------------------------------- Feature #6875: Make test/unit default gem https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/6875#change-33459 Author: kou (Kouhei Sutou) Status: Closed Priority: Normal Assignee: sorah (Shota Fukumori) Category: lib Target version: 2.0.0 test/unitをdefault gemにするパッチです。 http://bugs.ruby-lang.org/projects/ruby/wiki/StdlibGem に従ってバージョンは2.0.0.0にしています。 私はtest-unitというgemを作っています。test-unit gemがインストールされるとバンドルされているtest/unitよりも優先してtest-unit gemの方が使われると嬉しいのでこのパッチを書きました。
on 2012-11-22 07:34
Issue #6875 has been updated by uggsoutlet (uggsoutlet uggsoutlet). =begin would be an excellent rule. Such an attitude would emphasize ((<uggs on sale|URL:http://www.gooduggboots.org/>)) sharply the value of life. Every day we should with gentleness, vigor, hold ((<cheap ugg boots|URL:http://www.gooduggboots.org/>)) the heart of thanksgiving to life. But when the time for endless days, months and years passed in ((<uggs outlet|URL:http://www.gooduggboots.org/>)) front of us, we are often not the seed feeling. Of course, there is also " eat, drink, enjoy .458gyu854 =end ---------------------------------------- Feature #6875: Make test/unit default gem https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/6875#change-33502 Author: kou (Kouhei Sutou) Status: Closed Priority: Normal Assignee: sorah (Shota Fukumori) Category: lib Target version: 2.0.0 test/unitをdefault gemにするパッチです。 http://bugs.ruby-lang.org/projects/ruby/wiki/StdlibGem に従ってバージョンは2.0.0.0にしています。 私はtest-unitというgemを作っています。test-unit gemがインストールされるとバンドルされているtest/unitよりも優先してtest-unit gemの方が使われると嬉しいのでこのパッチを書きました。
on 2012-11-22 08:08
Issue #6875 has been updated by uggsonsale (uggsonsale uggsonsale). =begin the epicurean doctrine, but most people would be affected by the impending ((<uggs on sale|URL:http://www.uggbootslookmy.com/>)) penalty. In the story, the doomed hero is usually at the last minute by some stroke of luck and rescued, but his values usually will change, he becomes more appreciative of the meaning of life and the eternal spirit value. We often notice.458gyu854 =end ---------------------------------------- Feature #6875: Make test/unit default gem https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/6875#change-33544 Author: kou (Kouhei Sutou) Status: Closed Priority: Normal Assignee: sorah (Shota Fukumori) Category: lib Target version: 2.0.0 test/unitをdefault gemにするパッチです。 http://bugs.ruby-lang.org/projects/ruby/wiki/StdlibGem に従ってバージョンは2.0.0.0にしています。 私はtest-unitというgemを作っています。test-unit gemがインストールされるとバンドルされているtest/unitよりも優先してtest-unit gemの方が使われると嬉しいのでこのパッチを書きました。
on 2012-11-22 08:21
Issue #6875 has been updated by uggbootsstore (uggbootsstore uggbootsstore). =begin those who live in or have lived in the shadow ((<Uggs On Sale|URL:http://www.uggbootsstore.biz/>)) of death no matter what would be happy. However, most of us think of your <((<uggs outlet|URL:http://www.uggbootsstore.biz/>)) life as the behoove. We know that one day we must die, but usually we picture that day as far ((<Cheap Ugg Boots|URL:http://www.uggbootsstore.biz/>)) in the future. When we are in buoyant health, death is all but unimaginable, we seldom think of it. There seems no end date. 458gyu854 =end ---------------------------------------- Feature #6875: Make test/unit default gem https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/6875#change-33582 Author: kou (Kouhei Sutou) Status: Closed Priority: Normal Assignee: sorah (Shota Fukumori) Category: lib Target version: 2.0.0 test/unitをdefault gemにするパッチです。 http://bugs.ruby-lang.org/projects/ruby/wiki/StdlibGem に従ってバージョンは2.0.0.0にしています。 私はtest-unitというgemを作っています。test-unit gemがインストールされるとバンドルされているtest/unitよりも優先してtest-unit gemの方が使われると嬉しいのでこのパッチを書きました。
on 2012-11-22 08:22
Issue #6875 has been updated by uggbootsstore (uggbootsstore uggbootsstore). =begin those who live in or have lived in the shadow ((<Uggs On Sale|URL:http://www.uggbootsstore.biz/>)) of death no matter what would be happy. However, most of us think of your <((<uggs outlet|URL:http://www.uggbootsstore.biz/>)) life as the behoove. We know that one day we must die, but usually we picture that day as far ((<Cheap Ugg Boots|URL:http://www.uggbootsstore.biz/>)) in the future. When we are in buoyant health, death is all but unimaginable, we seldom think of it. There seems no end date. 458gyu854 =end ---------------------------------------- Feature #6875: Make test/unit default gem https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/6875#change-33587 Author: kou (Kouhei Sutou) Status: Closed Priority: Normal Assignee: sorah (Shota Fukumori) Category: lib Target version: 2.0.0 test/unitをdefault gemにするパッチです。 http://bugs.ruby-lang.org/projects/ruby/wiki/StdlibGem に従ってバージョンは2.0.0.0にしています。 私はtest-unitというgemを作っています。test-unit gemがインストールされるとバンドルされているtest/unitよりも優先してtest-unit gemの方が使われると嬉しいのでこのパッチを書きました。
on 2012-11-22 08:33
Issue #6875 has been updated by ueggsmarketing (ueggsmarketing ueggsmarketing). =begin limited to the. Such stories set us thinking, ((<cheap ugg boots|URL:http://www.ueggsmarketing.net/>)) in similar circumstances, what should we do? As mortal beings, in the last several hours we ought to do something, to ((<ugg boots on sale|URL:http://www.ueggsmarketing.net/>)) experience what associations? The memories of the past, what makes us happy? What makes us regret? Sometimes I think, regard every day as the last day in the life to come.458gyu854 =end ---------------------------------------- Feature #6875: Make test/unit default gem https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/6875#change-33619 Author: kou (Kouhei Sutou) Status: Closed Priority: Normal Assignee: sorah (Shota Fukumori) Category: lib Target version: 2.0.0 test/unitをdefault gemにするパッチです。 http://bugs.ruby-lang.org/projects/ruby/wiki/StdlibGem に従ってバージョンは2.0.0.0にしています。 私はtest-unitというgemを作っています。test-unit gemがインストールされるとバンドルされているtest/unitよりも優先してtest-unit gemの方が使われると嬉しいのでこのパッチを書きました。
Enable email notification
Enable multi-page viewPlease log in before posting. Registration is free and takes only a minute.
Existing account
(Switch to SSL-encrypted connection)
NEW: Do you have a Google/GoogleMail or Yahoo account? No registration required!
Log in with Google account | Log in with Yahoo account
Log in with Google account | Log in with Yahoo account
No account? Register here.