Subject says it all. Enjoy!
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Ruby
on Rails: Core group.
To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
Cool! Great job bringing it back!
On Wed, Aug 31, 2011 at 8:34 AM, Xavier Noria f...@hashref.com wrote:
Subject says it all. Enjoy!
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Ruby on Rails: Core group.
To post to this group, send email to
Hi guys,
While reading the 3.1 release notes in Rails Guides, I've stumbled
across this phrase:
The major change in Rails 3.1 is the Assets Pipeline. It makesCSSand
JavaScript first-class code citizens and enables proper organization,
including use in plugins and engines.
Then, I started
Nice to hear :)
2011/8/31 Sebastián Martínez smartine...@gmail.com
Cool! Great job bringing it back!
On Wed, Aug 31, 2011 at 8:34 AM, Xavier Noria f...@hashref.com wrote:
Subject says it all. Enjoy!
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Ruby on
A standard javascript testing library would be awesome.
Today we struggle with lots of different aproaches to test javascript, using
only selenium, capybara/selenium, cucumber/capybara/selenium, jasmine,
etc... And other non Rails techniques. It would be great if we could rely
and focus on a
+1 too, jasmine for unit testing and capybara for integration tests
Regards,
Wael
--
Wael Nasreddine
Sent from my iPhone
On Aug 31, 2011, at 19:46, Everton Moreth everton.mor...@gmail.com wrote:
A standard javascript testing library would be awesome.
Today we struggle with lots of different
On Wed, Aug 31, 2011 at 3:10 PM, Wael Nasreddine
wael.nasredd...@gmail.com wrote:
+1 too, jasmine for unit testing and capybara for integration tests
Well… make Jasmine optional and I'm a happy camper :)
Regards,
Wael
--
Wael Nasreddine
Sent from my iPhone
On Aug 31, 2011, at 19:46,
On Aug 31, 2011, at 20:14, Nicolás Sanguinetti
h...@nicolassanguinetti.info wrote:
On Wed, Aug 31, 2011 at 3:10 PM, Wael Nasreddine
wael.nasredd...@gmail.com wrote:
+1 too, jasmine for unit testing and capybara for integration tests
Well… make Jasmine optional and I'm a happy camper :)
I like Jasmine too.
On Wed, Aug 31, 2011 at 1:45 PM, Wael Nasreddine
wael.nasredd...@gmail.comwrote:
On Aug 31, 2011, at 20:14, Nicolás Sanguinetti
h...@nicolassanguinetti.info wrote:
On Wed, Aug 31, 2011 at 3:10 PM, Wael Nasreddine
wael.nasredd...@gmail.com wrote:
+1 too, jasmine for
I think due to the large number of testing frameworks out there for JavaScript,
we should leave this in the developer's hands and not make it a part of the
Rails core.
On 31/08/2011, at 23:06, Rodrigo Rosenfeld Rosas rr.ro...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi guys,
While reading the 3.1 release notes
When you do that, it would be similar to not adding tests on generators
or not providing Coffeescript or SASS support in a default new Rails
application.
I doubt Coffeescript would be largely used if not included in Rails by
default. I prefer Rspec over Test/Unit but I don't see any problems
What Rodrigo said.
+1 for jasmine
Allen Madsen
http://www.allenmadsen.com
On Wed, Aug 31, 2011 at 6:11 PM, Rodrigo Rosenfeld Rosas rr.ro...@gmail.com
wrote:
**
When you do that, it would be similar to not adding tests on generators or
not providing Coffeescript or SASS support in a
12 matches
Mail list logo