Issue #6875 has been reported by kou (Kouhei S.).
Feature #6875: Make test/unit default gem
Author: kou (Kouhei S.)
Status: Open
Priority: Normal
Assignee: sorah (Shota F.)
Category: lib
Target version: 2.0.0
test/unitをdefault gemにするパッチです。
(())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。
Issue #6875 has been updated by kou (Kouhei S.).
Description updated
Feature #6875: Make test/unit default gem
Author: kou (Kouhei S.)
Status: Open
Priority: Normal
Assignee: sorah (Shota F.)
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。
Issue #6875 has been updated by naruse (Yui NARUSE).
Feature #6875: Make test/unit default gem
Author: kou (Kouhei S.)
Status: Open
Priority: Normal
Assignee: sorah (Shota F.)
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。
Issue #6875 has been updated by kou (Kouhei S.).
あぁ、すみません、説明が足りませんでした。。。
Feature #6875: Make test/unit default gem
Author: kou (Kouhei S.)
Status: Open
Priority: Normal
Assignee: sorah (Shota F.)
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。
Issue #6875 has been updated by kou (Kouhei S.).
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？
[ 9418/11373] TestRubyMode::TestIndent#test_singleton_class = 0.00 s
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
Author: kou (Kouhei S.)
Status: Open
Priority: Normal
Assignee: sorah (Shota F.)
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。
$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, [email protected] 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
Issue #6875 has been updated by sorah (Shota F.).
Feature #6875: Make test/unit default gem
Author: kou (Kouhei S.)
Status: Open
Priority: Normal
Assignee: sorah (Shota F.)
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。
Issue #6875 has been updated by vo.x (Vit O.).
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:
Feature #6875: Make test/unit default gem
Author: kou (Kouhei S.)
Status: Closed
Priority: Normal
Assignee: sorah (Shota F.)
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。
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.
- 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.)
- 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?)
- 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.
Support normal gem require without explicit 'gem "name"' for default gem by kou · Pull Request #377 · rubygems/rubygems · GitHub )
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.
Issue #6875 has been updated by kou (Kouhei S.).
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 O.) wrote:
kou (Kouhei S.) 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)
- The gem usually contains code. It does not depend on some code lying
somewhere in the StdLibIt 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.
- 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.
Feature #6875: Make test/unit default gem
Author: kou (Kouhei S.)
Status: Closed
Priority: Normal
Assignee: sorah (Shota F.)
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。
Issue #6875 has been updated by vo.x (Vit O.).
kou (Kouhei S.) wrote:
Feature #6875: Make test/unit default gem - Ruby master - Ruby Issue Tracking System 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.
- 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 soIt 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.
- The gem usually contains code. It does not depend on some code lying
somewhere in the StdLibIt 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.
- 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.
Support normal gem require without explicit 'gem "name"' for default gem by kou · Pull Request #377 · rubygems/rubygems · GitHub )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?
Feature #6875: Make test/unit default gem
Author: kou (Kouhei S.)
Status: Closed
Priority: Normal
Assignee: sorah (Shota F.)
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。
Issue #6875 has been updated by vo.x (Vit O.).
kou (Kouhei S.) 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
- The gem usually contains code. It does not depend on some code lying
somewhere in the StdLibIt 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:Guidelines#Bundling_of_multiple_projects
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Treatment_Of_Bundled_Libraries
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:No_Bundled_Libraries
Actually, see also some comments from Lucas N., 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
Author: kou (Kouhei S.)
Status: Closed
Priority: Normal
Assignee: sorah (Shota F.)
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。
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
Author: kou (Kouhei S.)
Status: Closed
Priority: Normal
Assignee: sorah (Shota F.)
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。
Issue #6875 has been updated by kou (Kouhei S.).
Sorry for my late response…
vo.x (Vit O.) wrote:
kou (Kouhei S.) 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
Feature #6875: Make test/unit default gem
Author: kou (Kouhei S.)
Status: Closed
Priority: Normal
Assignee: sorah (Shota F.)
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。
Issue #6875 has been updated by uggsoutlet (uggsoutlet uggsoutlet).
Feature #6875: Make test/unit default gem
Author: kou (Kouhei S.)
Status: Closed
Priority: Normal
Assignee: sorah (Shota F.)
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。
Issue #6875 has been updated by uggbootsstore (uggbootsstore
uggbootsstore).
Feature #6875: Make test/unit default gem
Author: kou (Kouhei S.)
Status: Closed
Priority: Normal
Assignee: sorah (Shota F.)
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。
Issue #6875 has been updated by uggbootsstore (uggbootsstore
uggbootsstore).
Feature #6875: Make test/unit default gem
Author: kou (Kouhei S.)
Status: Closed
Priority: Normal
Assignee: sorah (Shota F.)
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。
Issue #6875 has been updated by uggsonsale (uggsonsale uggsonsale).
Feature #6875: Make test/unit default gem
Author: kou (Kouhei S.)
Status: Closed
Priority: Normal
Assignee: sorah (Shota F.)
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。
Issue #6875 has been updated by ueggsmarketing (ueggsmarketing
ueggsmarketing).
Feature #6875: Make test/unit default gem
Author: kou (Kouhei S.)
Status: Closed
Priority: Normal
Assignee: sorah (Shota F.)
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。
This forum is not affiliated to the Ruby language, Ruby on Rails framework, nor any Ruby applications discussed here.
Sponsor our Newsletter | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Remote Ruby Jobs