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

Revert setting RSpec expectation syntax to 'should' mode #3620

Merged
merged 2 commits into from Nov 16, 2018

Conversation

Projects
None yet
2 participants
@clintoncwolfe
Contributor

clintoncwolfe commented Nov 16, 2018

This PR reverts #3560, with the only change beyond the reversion being to add explanatory comments to a test.

#3560, included in inspec 3.0.46, explicitly set the RSpec expectation syntax to be should mode (as opposed to expect mode, or not setting it at all). This fixed #952, but also broke expect syntax.

While the InSpec project docs do not mention expect and generally prefer should for readability for non-programmers, RSpec has been moving to expect for a while, and many developers prefer it and have implemented their profiles using it. As a project, we don't want to insist on should; and besides, the circumstance in which #952 occurred are very rare and avoidable.

Hence the reversion.

Fixes #3616

clintoncwolfe added some commits Nov 16, 2018

Revert "Silence RSpec 'should' Warning (#3560)"
This reverts commit 7c611a4.

Signed-off-by: Clinton Wolfe <clintoncwolfe@gmail.com>
Add comment with link to reverted fix
Signed-off-by: Clinton Wolfe <clintoncwolfe@gmail.com>

@jquick jquick merged commit e4afadf into master Nov 16, 2018

4 checks passed

DCO This commit has a DCO Signed-off-by
Details
continuous-integration/appveyor/pr AppVeyor build succeeded
Details
continuous-integration/travis-ci/pr The Travis CI build passed
Details
expeditor/config-validation Validated your Expeditor config file
Details

@jquick jquick deleted the cw/revert-force-should-syntax branch Nov 16, 2018

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment