This comes out of this failure in Resque: http://travis-ci.org/#!/defunkt/resque/jobs/2550172
Test::Unit::AssertionFailedError: <"uninitialized constant NoJobDefinition"> expected but was
55<"Missing or uninitialized constant: Object::NoJobDefinition">.
Yes, should be testing this at a lower level maybe, but the point is that rbx shouldn't prefix this with Object::.
Why not, and what should it do instead? Object::NoJobDefinition is technically correct.
Technically correct if NoJobDefinition is a top level constant, of course. you didn't seem to say.
Only prefix const_missing in the message of it's not in Object
Fix build on rbx.
Uncovered an rbx bug, and filed a report:
Until it's fixed, we'll have to test this way.