Forum: Nitro First Comes Og

Announcement (2017-05-07): www.ruby-forum.com is now read-only since I unfortunately do not have the time to support and maintain the forum any more. Please see rubyonrails.org/community and ruby-lang.org/en/community for other Rails- und Ruby-related community platforms.
45196398e9685000d195ec626d477f0e?d=identicon&s=25 Trans (Guest)
on 2008-02-25 17:17
(Received via mailing list)
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.
407f866e9a1b959de956ae560239adfe?d=identicon&s=25 Jonathan Buch (Guest)
on 2008-02-27 12:41
(Received via mailing list)
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
45196398e9685000d195ec626d477f0e?d=identicon&s=25 Trans (Guest)
on 2008-02-27 15:55
(Received via mailing list)
On Feb 27, 6:38 am, "Jonathan Buch" <j...@oxyliquit.de> 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.
407f866e9a1b959de956ae560239adfe?d=identicon&s=25 Jonathan Buch (Guest)
on 2008-02-27 22:42
(Received via mailing list)
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.  :P

> 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.  :)

> 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
45196398e9685000d195ec626d477f0e?d=identicon&s=25 Trans (Guest)
on 2008-02-27 23:14
(Received via mailing list)
On Feb 27, 4:41 pm, "Jonathan Buch" <j...@oxyliquit.de> 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.  :P

:D 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.
Fd8f09626613a93a79e2ae899f00a465?d=identicon&s=25 Dan North (Guest)
on 2008-03-23 21:38
(Received via mailing list)
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
45196398e9685000d195ec626d477f0e?d=identicon&s=25 Trans (Guest)
on 2008-03-24 20:57
(Received via mailing list)
On Mar 23, 4:34 pm, "Dan North" <tasta...@gmail.com> 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.
7a4e995e378ef66de0ceaea5e1381ee1?d=identicon&s=25 George Moschovitis (Guest)
on 2008-03-24 21:01
(Received via mailing list)
Do you know what kind of changes are needed to make this compatible with
the
latest facets?
-g.
45196398e9685000d195ec626d477f0e?d=identicon&s=25 Trans (Guest)
on 2008-03-26 03:31
(Received via mailing list)
On Mar 24, 4:00 pm, "George Moschovitis"
<george.moschovi...@gmail.com> 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.
7a4e995e378ef66de0ceaea5e1381ee1?d=identicon&s=25 George Moschovitis (Guest)
on 2008-03-26 09:25
(Received via mailing list)
>
>
> I just committed my changes. The changes were mainly just adjusting
> some require statements.


can you remind me where they are commited?
-g.
45196398e9685000d195ec626d477f0e?d=identicon&s=25 Trans (Guest)
on 2008-03-26 12:45
(Received via mailing list)
On Mar 26, 4:24 am, "George Moschovitis"
<george.moschovi...@gmail.com> 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.
This topic is locked and can not be replied to.