[CI] Run specs and tests #119
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
| Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
|---|---|---|
|
|
@@ -24,7 +24,7 @@ Our roadmap for Net::LDAP 1.0 is to gain full <em>client</em> compliance with | |
| the most recent LDAP RFCs (4510-4519, plutions of 4520-4532).} | ||
| s.email = ["blackhedd@rubyforge.org", "gemiel@gmail.com", "rory.ocon@gmail.com", "kaspar.schiess@absurd.li", "austin@rubyforge.org"] | ||
| s.extra_rdoc_files = ["Manifest.txt", "Contributors.rdoc", "Hacking.rdoc", "History.rdoc", "License.rdoc", "README.rdoc"] | ||
| s.files = [".autotest", ".rspec", "Contributors.rdoc", "Hacking.rdoc", "History.rdoc", "License.rdoc", "Manifest.txt", "README.rdoc", "Rakefile", "autotest/discover.rb", "lib/net-ldap.rb", "lib/net/ber.rb", "lib/net/ber/ber_parser.rb", "lib/net/ber/core_ext.rb", "lib/net/ber/core_ext/array.rb", "lib/net/ber/core_ext/bignum.rb", "lib/net/ber/core_ext/false_class.rb", "lib/net/ber/core_ext/fixnum.rb", "lib/net/ber/core_ext/string.rb", "lib/net/ber/core_ext/true_class.rb", "lib/net/ldap.rb", "lib/net/ldap/dataset.rb", "lib/net/ldap/dn.rb", "lib/net/ldap/entry.rb", "lib/net/ldap/filter.rb", "lib/net/ldap/instrumentation.rb", "lib/net/ldap/password.rb", "lib/net/ldap/pdu.rb", "lib/net/snmp.rb", "net-ldap.gemspec", "spec/integration/ssl_ber_spec.rb", "spec/spec_helper.rb", "spec/unit/ber/ber_spec.rb", "spec/unit/ber/core_ext/string_spec.rb", "spec/unit/ldap/dn_spec.rb", "spec/unit/ldap/entry_spec.rb", "spec/unit/ldap/filter_spec.rb", "spec/unit/ldap_spec.rb", "test/common.rb", "test/test_entry.rb", "test/test_filter.rb", "test/test_ldap_connection.rb", "test/test_ldif.rb", "test/test_password.rb", "test/test_rename.rb", "test/test_snmp.rb", "test/testdata.ldif", "testserver/ldapserver.rb", "testserver/testdata.ldif", "lib/net/ldap/version.rb"] | ||
|
There was a problem hiding this comment. Any downside to changing this? `git ls-files`.split $/What's Manifest.txt used for above? It seems to have the same information as the gemspec. There was a problem hiding this comment. Moving to Not sure about There was a problem hiding this comment. Gonna punt on this so I can move this PR forward (which might help #121). |
||
| s.homepage = %q{http://github.com/ruby-ldap/ruby-net-ldap} | ||
| s.rdoc_options = ["--main", "README.rdoc"] | ||
| s.require_paths = ["lib"] | ||
|
|
||
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I'd like to drop official support for rbx for the 1.0 release as well, unless there's someone who's explicitly interested in supporting it. I don't think I can give it justice. Out of scope for this PR though.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Was feeling the same while testing this out. I think we can keep the builds, but put them under
allow_failuresso we can keep an eye on it.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
👍 to
allow_failures. Be good to addruby-headin there as well to foresee future incompatibilitiesThere was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Also gonna punt on moving
rbxto allowed failures/unofficial support.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
And by "unofficial support" I mean "not officially supported".