Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Update to rspec3 #204

Closed
wants to merge 6 commits into from
Closed

Update to rspec3 #204

wants to merge 6 commits into from

Conversation

doc75
Copy link
Contributor

@doc75 doc75 commented Jun 4, 2014

This PR is the migration of rspec-puppet te be compliant with RSpec 3.
WARNING it is not anymore compatible with RSpec2 versions, therefore it has to be decided it is time to merge it or not.

I tested it over all the personal modules I have and everything went smooth with this version and RSpec3 (only some minor update in the test suite were made)

@daenney
Copy link
Contributor

daenney commented Jun 9, 2014

There's a few PR's and issues by now but I think this one is the most complete #201, #200, #199, #198.

@hunner
Copy link
Collaborator

hunner commented Jun 11, 2014

👍

@kdimiche
Copy link

when will this PR be merged? We are looking forward to this functionality :)

@daenney
Copy link
Contributor

daenney commented Jun 27, 2014

@kdimiche ask @rodjek or @jeffmccune!

@javiplx
Copy link
Contributor

javiplx commented Aug 4, 2014

In my opinion, this PR should be not get merged yet, as rspec3 is too recent.
I would like to get access to new rspec features, but I would like also to get my current CI (jenkins on a debian box). For me it is not a big problem periodically repackage rspec-puppet to get the latest features, but I'm afraid of trying to do the same with rspec3 and the friends likely required by it.

@daenney
Copy link
Contributor

daenney commented Aug 4, 2014

I would like to get access to new rspec features, but I would like also to get my current CI (jenkins on a debian box).

Can you try that sentence again? I can't understand what you mean.

You're free not to upgrade to a new release. However not merging code that's the current way forward based on that argument seems like a bad idea.

@javiplx
Copy link
Contributor

javiplx commented Aug 5, 2014

I mean, that I would like to be able to use features from current & future pull request. And I'm just stating that these changes shouldn't be accepteded yet, obviously in my opinion, because moving into a two months old backward incompatible version is not a good idea, again in my opinion, but not because I have doubts about rspec3 but because not everyone lives on the edge (I have no chance to install rspec3 on our CI system).
For me #201, which enables pushing rspec to 2.99 while keeping compatibility is better to be accepted now, while this one is better targeted for future, neither too far nor too close to now.

@javiplx javiplx mentioned this pull request Aug 9, 2014
This conversion is done by Transpec 2.2.1 with the following command:
    transpec

* 58 conversions
    from: it { should ... }
      to: it { is_expected.to ... }

* 21 conversions
    from: obj.should
      to: expect(obj).to

* 11 conversions
    from: be_false
      to: be_falsey

* 6 conversions
    from: be_true
      to: be_truthy

* 6 conversions
    from: it { should_not ... }
      to: it { is_expected.not_to ... }

For more details: https://github.com/yujinakayama/transpec#supported-conversions
@doc75
Copy link
Contributor Author

doc75 commented Sep 28, 2014

Last commit is just a rebase on current master branch.
Hope this helps.

@tuxmea
Copy link
Contributor

tuxmea commented Oct 30, 2014

rspec 2/3 compatibility is already done in #225
Please close this PR.

@doc75
Copy link
Contributor Author

doc75 commented Oct 30, 2014

I'll check if the master works fine on my rspec3 projects and close this PR if everything is OK. I just hope that @rodjek will soon publish a new version of the gem.

@rnelson0
Copy link

@rodjek Any estimate on when the new gem version might be available? I'm eager to get rid of the deprecation messages from rspec3 :)

@doc75
Copy link
Contributor Author

doc75 commented Dec 28, 2014

Current code seems to be compatibe with RSpec 3 (but it uses RSpec 2.99 as far as I understand).
I hope a version using RSpec 3 only will be published.

@doc75 doc75 closed this Dec 28, 2014
@doc75 doc75 deleted the update-to-rspec3 branch May 9, 2015 08:13
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

7 participants