[lnkForumImage]
TotalShareware - Download Free Software
Confronta i prezzi di migliaia di prodotti.
Asp Forum
 Home | Login | Register | Search 


 

Forums >

comp.lang.ruby

[ANN] tinderbox 1.0.0 Released

Eric Hodel

1/31/2007 9:25:00 AM

tinderbox version 1.0.0 has been released!

http://seattlerb.rubyforge.org...

== DESCRIPTION:

Tinderbox tests projects and tries to make them break by running them
on as
many different platforms as possible.

== FEATURES/PROBLEMS:

* Tests gems in a sandbox
* Submits gem test results to http://firebrigade.sea...
* Understands test/unit and RSpec

Changes:

== 1.0.0 / 2007-01-30

* Tests gems in a sandbox
* Submits results to Firebrigade
* Birthday!

http://seattlerb.rubyforge.org...
18 Answers

Bil Kleb

1/31/2007 11:07:00 AM

0

Eric Hodel wrote:
> http://seattlerb.rubyforge.org...
>
> Tinderbox tests projects and tries to make them break by running them on as
> many different platforms as possible.

Five things:

1) Thank you; A most excellent contribution!

2) A pie chart!? Tufte would be sad.

3) How are projects selected to be tested? I.e., do I submit mine,
are they automatically added? (I'm too dense to find this info
on http://firebrigade.sea... or http://seattlerb.rubyforge.org.../.)

4) What's with the "000 act aed asl ben" pagination headers/footers
for the project listings?

5) Probably been reported before and not related
to Tinderbox, but why doesn't Rubygems understand
repeated dependencies?

$ sudo gem install tinderbox
Need to update 34 gems from http://gems.rub...
..................................
complete
Install required dependency firebrigade_api? [Yn] Y
Install required dependency rc-rest? [Yn]
Install required dependency hoe? [Yn]
Install required dependency rubyforge? [Yn]
Install required dependency rspec? [Yn]
Install required dependency hoe? [Yn]
Successfully installed tinderbox-1.0.0
Successfully installed firebrigade_api-1.0.0
Successfully installed rc-rest-2.1.0
Successfully installed hoe-1.1.7
Successfully installed rubyforge-0.4.0
Successfully installed rspec-0.7.5.1
Successfully installed hoe-1.1.7
[..]

Later,
--
Bil Kleb
http://funit.rub...

Ryan Davis

1/31/2007 6:56:00 PM

0


On Jan 31, 2007, at 3:10 AM, Bil Kleb wrote:

> 1) Thank you; A most excellent contribution!
>
> 2) A pie chart!? Tufte would be sad.

HEY! I had to relearn trig to get that stupid thing made! It even has
unit tests and is pixel perfect!

> 3) How are projects selected to be tested? I.e., do I submit mine,
> are they automatically added? (I'm too dense to find this info
> on http://firebrigade.sea... or http://
> seattlerb.rubyforge.org/tinderbox/.)

All of them. Any and every gem submitted.

> 4) What's with the "000 act aed asl ben" pagination headers/footers
> for the project listings?

Weird huh?

> 5) Probably been reported before and not related
> to Tinderbox, but why doesn't Rubygems understand
> repeated dependencies?

That looks like you still have a poisoned cache from December... The
pain and suffering continues, all thanks to one myopic developer.
Delete your personal and root's source_cache files and install again.

Eric Hodel

1/31/2007 7:04:00 PM

0

On Jan 31, 2007, at 03:10, Bil Kleb wrote:
> Eric Hodel wrote:
>> http://seattlerb.rubyforge.org...
>> Tinderbox tests projects and tries to make them break by running
>> them on as
>> many different platforms as possible.
>
> Five things:
>
> 1) Thank you; A most excellent contribution!

Its the most depressing Ruby project I've ever written.

> 2) A pie chart!? Tufte would be sad.

The pie chart makes me sad too, but for different reasons.

> 3) How are projects selected to be tested? I.e., do I submit mine,
> are they automatically added? (I'm too dense to find this info
> on http://firebrigade.sea... or http://
> seattlerb.rubyforge.org/tinderbox/.)

If its in the gem index, tinderbox tries to test it.

> 4) What's with the "000 act aed asl ben" pagination headers/footers
> for the project listings?

Encyclopedic pagination, so you know roughly where you're jumping
too. (But search is faster, and it kinda breaks down when you get to
the 'ruby*' projects.)

> 5) Probably been reported before and not related
> to Tinderbox, but why doesn't Rubygems understand
> repeated dependencies?

The Install is set for an overhaul in RubyGems 0.9.2. It takes a
recursive approach to installing dependencies, so may have these
kinds of issues.

David Chelimsky

1/31/2007 9:14:00 PM

0

On 1/31/07, Eric Hodel <drbrain@segment7.net> wrote:
> tinderbox version 1.0.0 has been released!
>
> http://seattlerb.rubyforge.org...
>
> == DESCRIPTION:
>
> Tinderbox tests projects and tries to make them break by running them
> on as
> many different platforms as possible.
>
> == FEATURES/PROBLEMS:
>
> * Tests gems in a sandbox
> * Submits gem test results to http://firebrigade.sea...
> * Understands test/unit and RSpec

Sweeeeeeet! Thanks.

Question - Does tinderbox know which version of RSpec to run against?
I ask because RSpec is still evolving and I'd hate for someone's specs
to fail in tinderbox because of an RSpec version mis-match.

Thanks,
David


>
> Changes:
>
> == 1.0.0 / 2007-01-30
>
> * Tests gems in a sandbox
> * Submits results to Firebrigade
> * Birthday!
>
> http://seattlerb.rubyforge.org...
>
>
>

Tim Pease

1/31/2007 9:48:00 PM

0

On 1/31/07, Eric Hodel <drbrain@segment7.net> wrote:
> On Jan 31, 2007, at 03:10, Bil Kleb wrote:
> > Eric Hodel wrote:
> >> http://seattlerb.rubyforge.org...
> >> Tinderbox tests projects and tries to make them break by running
> >> them on as
> >> many different platforms as possible.
> >
> > Five things:
> >
> > 1) Thank you; A most excellent contribution!
>
> Its the most depressing Ruby project I've ever written.

OK, I'm curious about why this was so depressing. Care to explain?

Frankly, I think it is wonderful, and I'm incredibly grateful for its
existence. The only depressing thing is how little green there is in
the overall pie chart view :(

>
> > 2) A pie chart!? Tufte would be sad.
>
> The pie chart makes me sad too, but for different reasons.
>
> > 3) How are projects selected to be tested? I.e., do I submit mine,
> > are they automatically added? (I'm too dense to find this info
> > on http://firebrigade.sea... or http://
> > seattlerb.rubyforge.org/tinderbox/.)
>
> If its in the gem index, tinderbox tries to test it.
>
> > 4) What's with the "000 act aed asl ben" pagination headers/footers
> > for the project listings?
>
> Encyclopedic pagination, so you know roughly where you're jumping
> too. (But search is faster, and it kinda breaks down when you get to
> the 'ruby*' projects.)
>
> > 5) Probably been reported before and not related
> > to Tinderbox, but why doesn't Rubygems understand
> > repeated dependencies?
>
> The Install is set for an overhaul in RubyGems 0.9.2. It takes a
> recursive approach to installing dependencies, so may have these
> kinds of issues.
>

I now understand why you and Ryan were so adamant about having Hoe
included as a dependency in people's gems. Makes sense from the
perspective of firebrigade and tinderbox.

Blessings,
TwP

Eric Hodel

1/31/2007 9:49:00 PM

0

On Jan 31, 2007, at 13:13, David Chelimsky wrote:
> Question - Does tinderbox know which version of RSpec to run against?
> I ask because RSpec is still evolving and I'd hate for someone's specs
> to fail in tinderbox because of an RSpec version mis-match.

Tinderbox tries the latest RSpec. If your package require a
particular version of RSpec it needs to be marked as a dependency.

Bil Kleb

1/31/2007 10:14:00 PM

0

Eric Hodel wrote:
>
> The pie chart makes me sad too, but for different reasons.

I can imagine, but the big visible chart (aka information
radiator) that you've created should help to remedy the
situation, no?

Now, we need the same thing for the Ruby language specification
tests against all the Ruby engines...

> If its in the gem index, tinderbox tries to test it.

Ah. OK, because of #4, no mention on the "gem developers" page,
and not noticing the search box, I didn't see very many gems.

>> 4) What's with the "000 act aed asl ben" pagination headers/footers
>> for the project listings?
>
> Encyclopedic pagination, so you know roughly where you're jumping too.

But it doesn't work?!

Thanks again for the wonderful BVC,
--
Bil Kleb
http://fun3d.lar...

pat eyler

1/31/2007 10:19:00 PM

0

On 1/31/07, Bil Kleb <Bil.Kleb@nasa.gov> wrote:
> Eric Hodel wrote:
> >
> > The pie chart makes me sad too, but for different reasons.
>
> I can imagine, but the big visible chart (aka information
> radiator) that you've created should help to remedy the
> situation, no?
>
> Now, we need the same thing for the Ruby language specification
> tests against all the Ruby engines...

Sadly, there's not (yet) a good set of specification tests for Ruby.
There are several that are getting there, and the writers of them
are starting to work together which will help a lot.

On the other hand, getting the a tinderbox running and reporting
for the various implmentations would be a good thing too. There's
no spec like a big pile of running code. ;^)

>
> > If its in the gem index, tinderbox tries to test it.
>
> Ah. OK, because of #4, no mention on the "gem developers" page,
> and not noticing the search box, I didn't see very many gems.
>
> >> 4) What's with the "000 act aed asl ben" pagination headers/footers
> >> for the project listings?
> >
> > Encyclopedic pagination, so you know roughly where you're jumping too.
>
> But it doesn't work?!
>
> Thanks again for the wonderful BVC,
> --
> Bil Kleb
> http://fun3d.lar...
>
>
>
>
>


--
thanks,
-pate
-------------------------
http://on-ruby.bl...

David Chelimsky

1/31/2007 10:58:00 PM

0

On 1/31/07, Eric Hodel <drbrain@segment7.net> wrote:
> On Jan 31, 2007, at 13:13, David Chelimsky wrote:
> > Question - Does tinderbox know which version of RSpec to run against?
> > I ask because RSpec is still evolving and I'd hate for someone's specs
> > to fail in tinderbox because of an RSpec version mis-match.
>
> Tinderbox tries the latest RSpec. If your package require a
> particular version of RSpec it needs to be marked as a dependency.
>

Cool. Thanks again.

David

Eric Hodel

1/31/2007 11:15:00 PM

0

On Jan 31, 2007, at 13:48, Tim Pease wrote:
> On 1/31/07, Eric Hodel <drbrain@segment7.net> wrote:
>> On Jan 31, 2007, at 03:10, Bil Kleb wrote:
>> > Eric Hodel wrote:
>> >> http://seattlerb.rubyforge.org...
>> >> Tinderbox tests projects and tries to make them break by running
>> >> them on as
>> >> many different platforms as possible.
>> >
>> > Five things:
>> >
>> > 1) Thank you; A most excellent contribution!
>>
>> Its the most depressing Ruby project I've ever written.
>
> OK, I'm curious about why this was so depressing. Care to explain?
>
> Frankly, I think it is wonderful, and I'm incredibly grateful for its
> existence. The only depressing thing is how little green there is in
> the overall pie chart view :(

Exactly this, too little green.

>> > 5) Probably been reported before and not related
>> > to Tinderbox, but why doesn't Rubygems understand
>> > repeated dependencies?
>>
>> The Install is set for an overhaul in RubyGems 0.9.2. It takes a
>> recursive approach to installing dependencies, so may have these
>> kinds of issues.
>
> I now understand why you and Ryan were so adamant about having Hoe
> included as a dependency in people's gems. Makes sense from the
> perspective of firebrigade and tinderbox.

Tinderbox does a best-effort, but some gems fail tests even when run
with testrb.