issue-7: modify all tests to be in pure YAML rather than raw ruby #26
Conversation
|
Note for myself: I need to update the |
|
@ttwo32 I would like to merge this in (once I fix the conflicts) so that it becomes our defacto way of doing tests going forward. Fixing conflicts has been very difficult for me and I would prefer that we just merge it, which will force me to finish the changes on the other repo. The downside to this approach is that we would not be able to do another release until I finish the test generation on the holidays repo but I think I'm basically done. Just fixing minor issues. And I think this is the pressure I need. What do you think? |
|
I think this is necessary to use these definitions in other languages. |
|
Great! Thank you @ttwo32. I would ask then that we do not merge any new definitions changes until this one is done. I'm almost done with the final bit of US conflicts and after that I'll make the necessary changes to the SYNTAX (thank you for reminding me!). Hopefully I'll have that handled today or tonight, at which point I'll put up the 'final' version of this for you to look over and I'll switch my attention to a release for the latest defs. |
|
Had to do a few merges because the changes were so big. I know this isn't as elegant as cleaner commits but...I'm just so tired of keeping these up to date. 😄 I'm going to get the release out now and then do the SYNTAX bit. |
|
@ttwo32 Done with SYNTAX update. 👍 |
|
@ttwo32 What do you think? Look good in the SYNTAX file? |
ppeble
force-pushed
the
issue-7
branch
5 times, most recently
from
627fa55
to
ed25c81
Compare
ppeble
force-pushed
the
issue-7
branch
6 times, most recently
from
9b1b723
to
a168bbb
Compare
| One or the other of the `expect` keys is required. If you do not specify a `name` then you should set `holiday: false`. | ||
|
|
||
| Here are some more examples. First example shows multiple dates, multiple regions, additional options, and an expectation that the result will be the named holiday. | ||
|
|
|
|
||
| The format is a straightforward 'given then expect'. Here is a simple example: |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Good.It,s easy to write test by 3 sections.
|
@ppeble Looks good to me!! I really appreciate your hard work.:) |
|
Woo, Why ruby 2.1.0 test failed? |
ppeble
force-pushed
the
issue-7
branch
3 times, most recently
from
e47262c
to
fbf1ac1
Compare
|
@ttwo32 I would like your permission to merge this to master, even though the ruby 2.1.0 tests are failing. We know it is already fixed in master and I don't want to have to either rebase or merge a new commit in just to make the PR fully pass. EDIT: nevermind! I guess I already got it? Not sure when I did that. Either way, this is good! Other than that...this is good! Basically done and ready to go. Here is the PR to use the new format in the ruby side: holidays/holidays#282 If you are okay with this merge, I will go to master and make sure it builds. Then I will change the ruby PR to point to master. Then we can have final signoff on the ruby side. Thanks! |
Fixes #7
Title says it all. What do we think? I would appreciate a spot check that I didn't leave any obvious mistakes. I automated the generation of the new YAML based off of the old ruby but...there was still a lot of manual intervention. I feel that the chances for errors are high.
I'm not going to merge this for a bit. Before I do that I need to get a branch up on the Ruby side to generate our tests from this YAML rather than just shoving the raw ruby that exists today. I don't know how long that will take (with my life circumstances, baby and all that).
I'm happy with how this turned out! 😄