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

Follow-up #3403: Add new option to bundle gem for choosing a CI service #3667

Merged
merged 26 commits into from Jun 9, 2020
Merged

Follow-up #3403: Add new option to bundle gem for choosing a CI service #3667

merged 26 commits into from Jun 9, 2020

Conversation

FTLam11
Copy link
Contributor

@FTLam11 FTLam11 commented May 29, 2020

Please refer to #3403 for full details. This PR is more of a follow-up and mainly incorporates naming/grammar suggestions while addressing some test suite failures.

One thing that may warrant discussion: Test framework selection/configuration does not currently affect the generation of CI files. So a user can choose to not generate test framework files, while still being able to generate CI files.


Tasks:

  • Describe the problem / feature
  • Write tests
  • Write code to solve the problem
  • Get code review from coworkers / friends

I will abide by the code of conduct.

Copy link
Member

@olleolleolle olleolleolle left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Looks good!

bundler/spec/commands/newgem_spec.rb Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
Copy link
Member

@deivid-rodriguez deivid-rodriguez left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Looks good, I added a few minor comments.

Regarding the potential discussion, we kind of already had it at #3584. But I feel it becomes a bit too tricky to make all this logic dependent on the --test logic... 🤔.

bundler/lib/bundler/templates/newgem/.gitlab-ci.yml.tt Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
bundler/lib/bundler/cli/gem.rb Show resolved Hide resolved
bundler/lib/bundler/cli.rb Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@FTLam11
Copy link
Contributor Author

FTLam11 commented May 30, 2020

I just remembered to also update bundle gem man pages for the new --ci option.

bundler/lib/bundler/cli/gem.rb Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
bundler/lib/bundler/cli/gem.rb Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
bundler/lib/bundler/cli/gem.rb Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
bundler/man/bundle-gem.1.txt Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
Copy link
Member

@deivid-rodriguez deivid-rodriguez left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Just some little things I noticed on the Github Actions configuration.

Copy link
Member

@deivid-rodriguez deivid-rodriguez left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Just one more round of comments. I believe it's the last one from me. Thanks for your patience, @FTLam11!

By the way, this PR uncovered an issue in rubygems' default bundler installer: #3674.

bundler/lib/bundler/cli/gem.rb Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
bundler/lib/bundler/cli/gem.rb Show resolved Hide resolved
Copy link
Member

@deivid-rodriguez deivid-rodriguez left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Found a little issue in the CircleCI template, and another little issue in the specs that made them not catch the bug in the template.

Copy link
Member

@deivid-rodriguez deivid-rodriguez left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This looks good to me, @FTLam11! Outstanding work again 😍

Only thing I wonder is whether it'd be better to introduce #3685 first, and then you rebase and remove the last commit from this PR, so that we don't introduce changes that are about to be reverted.

@FTLam11
Copy link
Contributor Author

FTLam11 commented Jun 4, 2020

Only thing I wonder is whether it'd be better to introduce #3685 first, and then you rebase and remove the last commit from this PR, so that we don't introduce changes that are about to be reverted.

Sounds good, I'll be on standby. Thanks for giving really thorough reviews through this entire PR, it has been very helpful.

@hsbt hsbt merged commit 8949097 into rubygems:master Jun 9, 2020
@deivid-rodriguez
Copy link
Member

Hi @FTLam11, as you can see from the merge, we ended up doing this in a different order than I had planned, so you no longer need to mess with rebasing this PR :)

Just wanted to thank you for your hard work on improving our gem generator 💪.

@FTLam11 FTLam11 deleted the 3404-bundle-gem-ci branch June 9, 2020 22:43
hsbt added a commit to ruby/ruby that referenced this pull request Jun 18, 2020
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Bundler CI CI related issues
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

8 participants