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

docs(CONTRIBUTING): Updated the test section to include Travis and saucelabs #1271

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

jadbox
Copy link
Contributor

@jadbox jadbox commented Jan 31, 2016

In reference to @staltz comment on #1257 to adding saucelabs information to the Travis configuration.

Ah neat. We need those instructions in CONTRIBUTING too

Btw, this is my first pull request to Rx: hoping I followed the right procedure here.

@jadbox jadbox changed the title docs(): Updated the test section to include Travis and saucelabs docs(CONTRIBUTING): Updated the test section to include Travis and saucelabs Jan 31, 2016
@@ -121,6 +121,9 @@ then it must cover the following cases:
- Success with the context, if any allowed in the operator signature
- If an error is thrown

#### <a id="unit-tests"></a>CI Tests
- Set your [Travis](https://travis-ci.org/) account to point against your fork
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

what about adding some more background explanation for these tests? below's few topics I can think of :

  • travis setup on forked repo will allow ci tests on forked repo without submitting PR to master
  • saucalabs setup will allow run browser test on forked repo: due to saucelab doesn't allow browser test on PR, this will help verify test results before PR's checked in master
  • since master runs both of test per each check in, it'd be welcome to setup those test for creating PR

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Good thought, @kwonoj. What do you think @jadbox?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Sounds great to me: updated PR now

@kwonoj
Copy link
Member

kwonoj commented Feb 4, 2016

Thanks for update! would you mind one small favor to flatten commit into single one? I think these change can be single commit, like

docs(CONTRIBUTING): update .....

I can handle those so feel freely ping me if you have difficulties with it, but would like to let you have full control over your contribution :)

@jadbox
Copy link
Contributor Author

jadbox commented Feb 5, 2016

Thanks @kwonoj, how does this look? (squash merged)

@kwonoj
Copy link
Member

kwonoj commented Feb 5, 2016

Thanks for update, yes, change looks good to me.

@kwonoj
Copy link
Member

kwonoj commented Feb 5, 2016

Merged with 142d99a, appreciate for effort @jadbox and hope to see further contributions! :)

@kwonoj kwonoj closed this Feb 5, 2016
@lock
Copy link

lock bot commented Jun 7, 2018

This thread has been automatically locked since there has not been any recent activity after it was closed. Please open a new issue for related bugs.

@lock lock bot locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators Jun 7, 2018
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants