Implement CI Testing with Saucelabs

[evilaliv3]

This pull request implement support for testing scrypt-async-js in the cloud among multiple user browsers by means of SauceLabs.com.

@dchest: this cloud service is free for opensource projects and would be valuable to add it for scrpt-async so to properly validate the implementation against browsers setups.

Image used in the badge: https://saucelabs.com/browser-matrix/evilaliv3.svg
Readme.md badge viewable at: https://github.com/evilaliv3/scrypt-async-js/tree/feature/saucelabs

p.s. i've also removed the grunt-string-replace library that i included wrongly in previowu pull request

[coveralls]

Coverage remained the same at 97.89% when pulling a2fa68f on evilaliv3:feature/saucelabs into 77d510b on dchest:master.

[dchest]

Awesome, thanks! Do you think this can be fixed: https://travis-ci.org/dchest/scrypt-async-js/jobs/61231467#L326 ? Is this a timeout?

[evilaliv3]

the internal code is the following:

        if (attempts === 0) {
          var errorMessage = "After trying " + me.statusCheckAttempts +
                             " times with a delay of " + me.pollInterval +
                             "s, this job never reached 'complete' status.";
          throw new Error(errorMessage);
        } else {
          return Q
            .delay(me.pollInterval)
            .then(fetch.bind(this, retries));
        }

so if i'm not wrong reading from https://github.com/axemclion/grunt-saucelabs the relevant wariables should be:

pollInterval: Number of milliseconds between each retry to see if a test is completed or not (default: 2000). Optional

statusCheckAttempts: Number of times to attempt to see if a test is completed or not (default: 90). Effectively, your tests have statusCheckAttempts * pollInterval seconds to complete (Thus, 180s by default). Set to -1 to try foreve

[dchest]

@evilaliv3 will you set it or should I try?

[evilaliv3]

ah! you were waiting for me!

sorry let me do it now.

[dchest]

No hurry, I wasn't actually waiting for anything, was just busy with other things :-) Would be good if the CI build passes before I merge.

[coveralls]

Coverage remained the same at 97.89% when pulling 68fce80 on evilaliv3:feature/saucelabs into 77d510b on dchest:master.

[coveralls]

Coverage remained the same at 97.89% when pulling f0a1929 on evilaliv3:feature/saucelabs into 77d510b on dchest:master.

[coveralls]

Coverage remained the same at 97.89% when pulling d54fcaa on evilaliv3:feature/saucelabs into 77d510b on dchest:master.

[coveralls]

Coverage remained the same at 97.89% when pulling c96fd30 on evilaliv3:feature/saucelabs into 77d510b on dchest:master.

[evilaliv3]

Ok @dchest i finally succeded.
i removed the specific test you put against node 0.10, 0.12 and iojs and i simply written "stable".
iojs was having issues to run the instrumented code. eventually we should differentiate but i think that now that we have real browser tests it is not required that we test against node as the libray is thought for the browsers.

[coveralls]

Coverage remained the same at 97.89% when pulling e016607 on evilaliv3:feature/saucelabs into 77d510b on dchest:master.

[dchest]

Yay, thank you!