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

Storyteller 5.0 Discussion #734

Closed
jeremydmiller opened this issue Oct 4, 2017 · 4 comments
Closed

Storyteller 5.0 Discussion #734

jeremydmiller opened this issue Oct 4, 2017 · 4 comments
Milestone

Comments

@jeremydmiller
Copy link
Member

cc @danjacka @JarrodJ83 @izep @apboyle @JordanZaerr @joemcbride

I'm freeing up after this week and I can probably get away with dedicating a couple weeks to Storyteller, and it definitely needs some love. At a minimum, how is this for a set of planned project improvements?

  • Update the client side Javascript components to the latest versions of all (React 14 to 16)
  • I'll keep the Rake script for the official CI build and the doc publishing, but introduce shell scripts
    build.cmd & build.sh to build and run tests for folks that don't wanna mess w/ Ruby
  • Iron out the socket issues. The fixes for Linux OS's didn't play nice on Windows. Might be time
    for some conditional logic and definitely time for a TravisCI build on Storyteller so we have CI in
    both Windows & Linux at a minimum (I mostly code on OSX, so that'll at least be covered)
  • Take another shot at smoothing out the dotnet cli mechanics in dotnet-storyteller. See if we can
    reverse engineer xUnit and see if we can use the build products instead of dotnet-storyteller
    having its own copy of Storyteller. Try to collapse StorytellerRunner into dotnet-storyteller? Lock
    the released version of dotnet-storyteller to the same version of Storyteller to eliminate user
    confusion

In terms of new functionality, my priority list in order would be:

  1. dotnet test adapter
  2. Tags - folks have asked about it recently
  3. Export specifications to a static HTML report where non-developers (or developers) could easily browse specifications\
  4. Run the client in "headless" mode - this is quite a bit harder, so I'm not sure if this really gets to happen

I've also started a milestone for this one.

Any thoughts on this one? I wouldn't turn down any help, but I really just wanted some feedback on all of this.

@jeremydmiller jeremydmiller added this to the 4.5.0 milestone Oct 4, 2017
@jeremydmiller
Copy link
Member Author

Forget the dotnet test adapter. The mechanics are absolutely bonkers. I'm going to vote for a much simpler mechanism so you could F5 an individual spec or suite from an ST project

@jeremydmiller
Copy link
Member Author

Now I'm leaning heavily toward doing a full 5.0 release here and making a few breaking changes in the command line and packages:

  • Eliminate support for the old AppDomain/StorytellerRunnerCsProj, meaning that only the new VS2017 project format and dotnet CLI would be supported
  • Change dotnet-storyteller so that it’s only the editor?
  • Make all other commands like just running the specs (dotnet storyteller run today) be part of the actual spec project. Drastically simplifies some of the mechanics by removing the need to use sockets back and forth except when using the editor
  • Add more support in the command line arguments to the actual spec project for including or excluding tags, key/value properties and profiles for conditional construction of the ISystem.

@jeremydmiller jeremydmiller changed the title Storyteller 4.5 Discussion Storyteller 5.0 Discussion Oct 11, 2017
@apboyle
Copy link
Contributor

apboyle commented Oct 12, 2017

Moving things into the spec project sounds good to me. Will make debugging easier because at the moment we have to work out which dotnet process to attach to (or just attach them all).
We've got no need for anything other than VS2017 and dotnet CLI on our project, so that's sounds ok as well.

@jeremydmiller
Copy link
Member Author

Most of this got done, and I've personally been happy with the changes. Cleaning this up.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants