>> Cordova-js uses jasmine-node as a devDependency and it seems to work out >> fine.
Alas, I was hoping jasmine-node would be sufficient, but I realized it does not seem to include any of Jasmine's CSS files by default (not surprised..), which are currently used for the browser based test runner (i.e. jake btest). Regardless of any questions of "do we need a browser based runner?" or seeing if they project will include Jasmine's CSS files, it seems like jasmine-node is not ideal.. :-s However, regarding pulling in Jasmine as a tar.gz URL from GitHub: That works at first, but npm exits prematurely for any tagged release (ex v1.3.1), because package.json has only existed in the project after the last tag. Urrrrgh.. So, you can include it by referencing a specific SHA in master (ex: version says 2.0.0-alpha.. https://github.com/pivotal/jasmine/archive/9c4467bac0f892ce133f9ca0b53e818d53f303d5.tar.gz Thoughts? IMO, if it makes it easier and there are no API breakages, perhaps it is alright to clone Jasmine from a non-release commit tip (given there are no breakages with using a 2.x.x version). I could go either way. On Fri, Apr 12, 2013 at 5:48 AM, Filip Maj <[email protected]> wrote: > Cordova-js uses jasmine-node as a devDependency and it seems to work out > fine. > > If someone runs npm install --production they will only get what's under > dependencies in package.json, not devDependencies [1]. > > [1] > http://stackoverflow.com/questions/9268259/how-do-you-install-development-o > nly-npm-modules-for-node-js-package-json<http://stackoverflow.com/questions/9268259/how-do-you-install-development-only-npm-modules-for-node-js-package-json> > > On 4/11/13 6:14 PM, "Brent Lintner" <[email protected]> wrote: > > >Good question, lol.. that might be even better, and fix the issue I was > >talking about. Perhaps even a GitHub commit URL if that is possible. There > >is also something like jasmine-node that could work (which was not awesome > >when we first started using node + jasmine). Perhaps I'll see about one of > >those vs directly adding it to the tree, then. :-) > > > > > >On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 10:12 AM, Filip Maj <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> Yea axe that stuff > >> > >> Why can't this be added as a devDependency to package.json ? > >> > >> On 4/11/13 4:00 PM, "Gord Tanner" <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > >> >+1 > >> > > >> >submodules have always annoyed me. Cleaning up our installation / dev > >>env > >> >setup would be nice and tie in good with attempting to get `npm > >>install` > >> >support working > >> > > >> > > >> >On Wed, Apr 3, 2013 at 4:06 PM, Dan Silivestru > >> ><[email protected]>wrote: > >> > > >> >> +1 > >> >> > >> >> I think we've talked about doing this for a little while. > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> On Wed, Apr 3, 2013 at 3:55 PM, Brent Lintner > >><[email protected] > >> >> >wrote: > >> >> > >> >> > Hey all, > >> >> > > >> >> > I want to remove our Jasmine dependency from .gitmodules because > >>it is > >> >> the > >> >> > only thing used as a .git module, and because git submodules have > >>(in > >> >>my > >> >> > experience) been more annoying to have than the benefit they > >>provide. > >> >> > Instead, it will be added directly to the project source tree (like > >> >> > everything else that is not in the NPM registry). > >> >> > > >> >> > This will also remove all use of .gitmodules, and will also remove > >>a > >> >> single > >> >> > step in 'configure', leaving only npm calls, which will make > >> >>installation > >> >> > more simple and straightforward. > >> >> > > >> >> > I will also be removing and re-adding the latest version of > >>Jasmine. > >> >> > > >> >> > Thoughts? > >> >> > > >> >> > -- > >> >> > Brent > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> -- > >> >> Dan Silivestru > >> >> +1 (519) 589-3624 > >> >> > >> > >> > > > > > >-- > >Brent > > -- Brent
