Rename gem to rspec-mongoid

[nofxx]

Always feels pedant when I open this issue on projects, but it's for the greater good (so I think):

http://guides.rubygems.org/name-your-gem/

It's a really minor issue to fix this way:

mv lib/mongoid-rspec lib/mongoid && mkdir lib/mongoid/rspec
mv lib/mongoid/version.rb lib/mongoid/rspec/version.rb
mv lib/mongoid-rspec.rb lib/mongoid/rspec.rb
echo "require 'mongoid/rspec'" >> lib/mongoid-rspec.rb

Keeps old require, require 'mongoid-rspec'no need to ppl change their code.
But the correct require: 'mongoid/rspec' will now work too.

[nofxx]

Or maybe with now with the mongoid5 changes is a good hour to add a deprecated message to the old require .rb file. #149

[rodrigopinto]

Hey @nofxx thanks to point it. Currently this gem is practically unmaintained. because me and @evansagge are not working with mongo/mongoid anymore. If you could to send this PR with bump version I would appreciate.

Valeu @nofxx ! 👍

[vidkun]

@nofxx @90yukke Is this gem adding rspec functionality to mongoid, or is it adding mongoid functionality to rspec?

I would think it's the latter and in which case, the naming (per the rubygems guide) would actually be 'rspec-mongoid'.

And as a side question, should we name gems for the technology support being added or the gem support being added when the names differ. For example, this gem. Should it be 'rspec-mongoid' after the gem, or 'rspec-mongodb' after the technology?

Your thoughts?

[akarmes]

@vidkun I agree that 'rspec-mongoid' fits better.

@rodrigopinto @evansagge What do you think guys? Does it make sense to rename github organisation/gem right now? I can add deprecation message to "mongoid-rspec" gem and start new one within this organisation.

[nofxx]

Had the same issue the other day. Same scenario:
Rake functionality for Cordova, (re)named it cordova-rake.
Also as a plus for the name change, other famous rspec projects follow that convention rspec-rails, rspec-sidekiq.

@vidkun About the mongoid/mongodb keep it mongoid , after the gem. Other way it gives the impression it's ODM agnostic, or that it'll be testing the DB itself, not my code.

[vidkun]

@nofxx Cool. That question was more as a general rule which is better. Your answer still makes sense though. Thanks.

[dblock]

If someone cares about this a lot I can help with the change before we release the next version via #193.