First Comes Og


#1

Prioritizing the release of Nitro 0.50, first thing is to do is get Og
in order and I’m going to do that as a fully separate package. So I’m
using the Ogden repository to facilitate this. It’s just a copy of the
Og repo from about a month or so ago.

Three things to do:

  1. If any changes were made to Og darcs in the last month, please port
    those changes to Ogden’s repo.
  2. Remove use of facets/paramix.rb (its begin deprecated). This
    effects Orderable and Hierarchical mixins (any others?)
  3. Get the tests passing. Most of them are failing, and I need people
    more familiar with the Og’s internals to help fix.

I’m not sure how much the failing tests has to do with the switch from
test/unit to rspec. Who did this transition? Were the specs ever all
passing?

Ogden is usintg SVN and not darcs. Please see this page to check out a
copy:

http://rubyforge.org/scm/?group_id=5023

And let me know if you need to be added as an team developer.

Thanks,
T.


#2

Hi,

I’m not sure how much the failing tests has to do with the switch from
test/unit to rspec. Who did this transition? Were the specs ever all
passing?

I translated all of Ogs specs and some of the Nitro ones.
The specs were passing about 80% as far as I can remember.

As a sidenote: I resented the change to rspec, it was introduced in
a hurry, was not executed by someone knowledgeable enough, did not have
full backing from George and as a result is now in it’s usual morbid
half-state.

Before the switch to rspec my mind tells me that about 3 tests failed.

How about that. If you can personally assure me that the spec structure
is basically working, that only rake test or similar has to be done
and that a strict ‘only patches passing all tests’-policy will be used
on Ogden - then I will have a look at the failing specs.

Jo


#3

On Feb 27, 6:38 am, “Jonathan B.” removed_email_address@domain.invalid wrote:

a hurry, was not executed by someone knowledgeable enough, did not have
full backing from George and as a result is now in it’s usual morbid
half-state.

I did too. Not that it was a bad idea in the long run, but it was very
much wrong time to be doing it.

Before the switch to rspec my mind tells me that about 3 tests failed.

How about that. If you can personally assure me that the spec structure
is basically working,

I think so. I’m still trying to understand it myself. I assume it was
correct to just load all the .rb files within the test/ directory.
Since there is no spec_ prefix, or anything like that, I could only
assume this to be the case. It seems to be working for the most part –
with the exception of warnings about constants being reset. I will
keep working to improve this, and make sure it is working right Any
help you can offer in the way of this is appreciated.

that only rake test or similar has to be done

Yes, just run “ruby task/test”.

and that a strict ‘only patches passing all tests’-policy will be used
on Ogden - then I will have a look at the failing specs.

Yes. After we get 0.50 out the door (which George has been asking me
do for weeks now), we will switch to a proper patch policy with
branches and passing tests. In fact, would you like to be in change of
overseeing that?

T.


#4

On Feb 27, 4:41 pm, “Jonathan B.” removed_email_address@domain.invalid wrote:

Hi,

I think so. I’m still trying to understand it myself. I assume it was
correct to just load all the .rb files within the test/ directory.
Since there is no spec_ prefix, or anything like that, I could only

another annoyance; one gets what one asks for. :stuck_out_tongue:

:smiley: If it’s any consolation I’ll buy a beer (or preferred beverage).

ruby: No such file or directory – task/test (LoadError)
jo:ogden jo:1$ ls task/
clobber rdoc setup

Sorry. I worked on these last night and forgot to check them in. They
should be there now.

In fact, would you like to be in change of overseeing that?

No, I don’t see that coming yet. As I’m wrapping up my University
time this semester, I very much doubt I have the leasure time to
do maintainer work.
All I hope I can do is putting my Og knowledge to use to at least get
it in a half stable state.

Understood. Hopefully a couple of other interested and capable
programmers will turn up once we get 0.50 out the door. I’m pretty
busy too.

T.


#5

Hi folks.

I just downloaded from the svn link and ran task/test and got the
following:

Finished in 7.722335 seconds

19 examples, 13 failures

Is this the same thing you guys are getting or am I even more out of
whack
than you?

Thanks,
Dan


#6

Hi,

I think so. I’m still trying to understand it myself. I assume it was
correct to just load all the .rb files within the test/ directory.
Since there is no spec_ prefix, or anything like that, I could only

another annoyance; one gets what one asks for. :stuck_out_tongue:

assume this to be the case. It seems to be working for the most part –
with the exception of warnings about constants being reset. I will
keep working to improve this, and make sure it is working right Any
help you can offer in the way of this is appreciated.

that only rake test or similar has to be done

Yes, just run “ruby task/test”.

jo:ogden jo:0$ ruby task/test
ruby: No such file or directory – task/test (LoadError)
jo:ogden jo:1$ ls task/
clobber rdoc setup

and that a strict ‘only patches passing all tests’-policy will be used
on Ogden - then I will have a look at the failing specs.

Yes. After we get 0.50 out the door (which George has been asking me
do for weeks now), we will switch to a proper patch policy with
branches and passing tests.

But of course, until there is actually a Ogden which has no failing
tests, that point is moot. But I like the plan. :slight_smile:

In fact, would you like to be in change of overseeing that?

No, I don’t see that coming yet. As I’m wrapping up my University
time this semester, I very much doubt I have the leasure time to
do maintainer work.
All I hope I can do is putting my Og knowledge to use to at least get
it in a half stable state.

Jo


#7

On Mar 23, 4:34 pm, “Dan N.” removed_email_address@domain.invalid wrote:

Hi folks.

I just downloaded from the svn link and ran task/test and got the following:

Finished in 7.722335 seconds

19 examples, 13 failures

Is this the same thing you guys are getting or am I even more out of whack
than you?

That’s about the state of things right now. I just spent about 15
minutes updating my copy to the latest Facets and I end up with 11
failures.

There is some clear work that needs to be done before a new release –
mainly removing the use of paramix.rb and then getting the tests to
pass. But I haven’t had any time lately to work on it. It would be
great if someone wanted to dive in.

T.


#8

On Mar 24, 4:00 pm, “George M.”
removed_email_address@domain.invalid wrote:

Do you know what kind of changes are needed to make this compatible with the
latest facets?
-g.

I just committed my changes. The changes were mainly just adjusting
some require statements.

T.


#9

I just committed my changes. The changes were mainly just adjusting
some require statements.

can you remind me where they are commited?
-g.


#10

Do you know what kind of changes are needed to make this compatible with
the
latest facets?
-g.


#11

On Mar 26, 4:24 am, “George M.”
removed_email_address@domain.invalid wrote:

I just committed my changes. The changes were mainly just adjusting
some require statements.

can you remind me where they are commited?

http://rubyforge.org/scm/?group_id=5023

T.