Firebrigade_api 1.0.0 Released

Ruby
1

firebrigade_api version 1.0.0 has been released!

http://seattlerb.rubyforge.org/firebrigade_api

== DESCRIPTION

An API wrapper for http://firebrigade.seattlerb.org

== FEATURES/PROBLEMS

Changes:

== 1.0.0 / 2007-01-30

2

On Jan 31, 2007, at 01:12, Eric H. wrote:

firebrigade_api version 1.0.0 has been released!

Oops! I forgot to bump the rc-rest version up to 2.2.1. If you’re
missing RCRest::CommunicationError, please upgrade.

3

On Jan 31, 2007, at 09:56, Mat S. wrote:

$ sudo gem install rc-rest --version 2.2.1
ERROR: While executing gem … (Gem::GemNotFoundException)
Could not find rc-rest (= 2.2.1) in any repository

I just modified gem_tinderbox.rb for the time being to use
RCRest::Error instead. I’m guessing it’s just a propagation issue.

It was a problem with the gem indexer, and moving rc-rest over to
seattlerb. All patched up now.

Nice work, Eric!

Thanks.

Anyone else feel like Ruby is blazing ahead of other languages in
terms of code quality? :slight_smile:

Not with that much red in the pie chart :slight_smile:

4

On Jan 31, 2007, at 5:12 AM, Eric H. wrote:

On Jan 31, 2007, at 01:12, Eric H. wrote:

firebrigade_api version 1.0.0 has been released!

Oops! I forgot to bump the rc-rest version up to 2.2.1. If you’re
missing RCRest::CommunicationError, please upgrade.

This is really awesome stuff. But sadly, I can’t seem to get rc-rest
2.2.1

$ sudo gem install rc-rest --version 2.2.1
ERROR: While executing gem … (Gem::GemNotFoundException)
Could not find rc-rest (= 2.2.1) in any repository

I just modified gem_tinderbox.rb for the time being to use
RCRest::Error instead. I’m guessing it’s just a propagation issue.

Nice work, Eric!

Anyone else feel like Ruby is blazing ahead of other languages in
terms of code quality? :slight_smile:
-Mat

5

Eric H. wrote:

On Jan 31, 2007, at 09:56, Mat S. wrote:

Anyone else feel like Ruby is blazing ahead of other languages in
terms of code quality? :slight_smile:
Not with that much red in the pie chart :slight_smile:
You know, I’d be interested to see the rcov stats…

6

On Jan 31, 2007, at 17:14, Devin M. wrote:

Eric H. wrote:

On Jan 31, 2007, at 09:56, Mat S. wrote:

Anyone else feel like Ruby is blazing ahead of other languages
in terms of code quality? :slight_smile:
Not with that much red in the pie chart :slight_smile:
You know, I’d be interested to see the rcov stats…

There’s no reason the Firebrigade stack couldn’t support additional
tinderboxes such as an rcov tinderbox. (I’m open to the idea, too.)

7

On Jan 31, 8:57 pm, Eric H. [email protected] wrote:

tinderboxes such as an rcov tinderbox. (I’m open to the idea, too.)
Nice stuff Eric.

How does one test a local gem with tinderbox?
I’d like to run it locally to debug a few gems, but the documentation
on this is a bit ‘sparse’.

_Kevin

8

On Feb 1, 2007, at 04:45, _Kevin wrote:

tinderboxes such as an rcov tinderbox. (I’m open to the idea, too.)

Nice stuff Eric.

How does one test a local gem with tinderbox?

run tinderbox_gem_build with the gem name and the version. I think
it picks up local gems, but I don’t recall. (If not, file a bug on
the seattlerb tracker.)

I’d like to run it locally to debug a few gems, but the documentation
on this is a bit ‘sparse’.

I’ll add the names and a brief description of the two command-line
tools to the Tinderbox RDoc.