Skip to content

Move #738 regression check to spec #1565

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

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Feb 28, 2016
Merged

Conversation

JonRowe
Copy link
Member

@JonRowe JonRowe commented Feb 28, 2016

This is confusing and not useful as documentation, all #738 was intended
to do was to prevent our let definitions from being defined earlier than
3rd party inclusions (and hence being overridden) which was confusing
behaviour, so move it to a spec.

/cc @samphippen @myronmarston

This is confusing and not useful as documentation, all #738 was intended
to do was to prevent our let definitions from being defined earlier than
3rd party inclusions (and hence being overriden) which was confusing
behaviour, so move it to a spec.
@myronmarston
Copy link
Member

Did you confirm that this spec fails if you revert the fix from #738? Not absolutely necessary, but it's always nice to check that this spec will catch a regression here. I've seen enough subtle differences between the spec environment and the cucumber environment that it's hard to tell w/o actually trying it.

@JonRowe
Copy link
Member Author

JonRowe commented Feb 28, 2016

I didn't, but I did check how the behaviour was affected by including in various places vs the let definition and I'm confident this spec represents the behaviour we expect. We could remove this check altogether if you like because the fix was actually reverted after an update to rspec-core...

@myronmarston
Copy link
Member

LGTM except for the travis failure.

JonRowe added a commit that referenced this pull request Feb 28, 2016
@JonRowe JonRowe merged commit 56f7d3c into master Feb 28, 2016
@JonRowe JonRowe deleted the move_regression_check_to_spec branch February 28, 2016 06:45
@JonRowe
Copy link
Member Author

JonRowe commented Feb 28, 2016

Merging despite build failure, as that happens to be unrelated (master also fails)

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.

2 participants