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

Make rspec a development dependency instead of a runtime dependency #23

Closed

Conversation

ryanoglesby08
Copy link

This is so that the taza gem can be used in projects that are on rspec-3 now. By taking it out of the runtime dependencies, there will not be any version mismatch errors for rspec.

There may be other gems in taza that are declared as runtime dependencies when they actually are only development dependencies. I decided to only address the rspec dependency for now.

@lunks
Copy link
Member

lunks commented Oct 10, 2014

I think it would make more sense if we could have development locked on 2.x, but allow runtime to be >2, <4. I'm not sure it's possible to have the same gem as a development and a runtime dependency but with different versions, but do give it a try. If it doesn't work, we'll go with this approach.

@ryanoglesby08
Copy link
Author

Actually, I overlooked that rspec is used for more than just the gem's specs. Somehow I missed the rake tasks. Looks like rspec is indeed a runtime dependency. This pull request is no good then!

Is there a specific reason you want to lock development at rspec 2.x. With a project this small, upgrading dev to rspec 3 would be painless. Then you could allow the runtime dependency to be >2, <4.

@lunks
Copy link
Member

lunks commented Oct 10, 2014

If you want to port our specs to RSpec 3, feel free to do so, I'll accept the PR. We can make it a major version bump and lock on RSpec 3.

@uchagani
Copy link
Member

I've already done this. I believe the PR was closed.
On Oct 10, 2014 6:37 PM, "Pedro Nascimento" notifications@github.com
wrote:

If you want to port our specs to RSpec 3, feel free to do so, I'll accept
the PR. We can make it a major version bump and lock on RSpec 3.


Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#23 (comment).

@ryanoglesby08
Copy link
Author

@uchagani Which PR are you referring to?

It does look like all the specs are using the new expect syntax, so should be easy to bump up the rspec dependency to 3 and do a major version bump

@uchagani
Copy link
Member

Nevermind, I was thinking about rake.

… failing example formatter. Major version bump to 1.0
@ryanoglesby08
Copy link
Author

I have made another commit that bumps rspec to 3.x and adds rspec back as a runtime dependency. Everything seems to be working fine.

@lunks
Copy link
Member

lunks commented Oct 13, 2014

Can you change the version to 0.10.0 for now?

@Rodion13
Copy link

Rodion13 commented Jan 9, 2015

Was looking for this for a while. Was thinking to do it myself. Thanks.

@lunks
Copy link
Member

lunks commented Jan 9, 2015

Whoops, it seems this has slipped over for a couple of months. Could you set it as a development dependency as intended? I'll do a quick look at the code to see if anything breaks and release it then.

@Rodion13
Copy link

Rodion13 commented Jan 9, 2015

@lunks just did a commit. can you check and release? Thank you!

@lunks
Copy link
Member

lunks commented Jan 9, 2015

Where, @Rodion13 ?

@Rodion13
Copy link

Rodion13 commented Jan 9, 2015

@lunks, created. #25

uchagani added a commit that referenced this pull request Jan 8, 2016
Confirmed with @orieken that he is okay with this PR.  @lunks has expressed approval in the past.  As such, i'm going to merge this.  This PR also satisfies #25 and #23.
@uchagani
Copy link
Member

uchagani commented Jan 8, 2016

Implemented with #29

@uchagani uchagani closed this Jan 8, 2016
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.

None yet

4 participants