Here's some "advertising" for aruba's new console... https://www.fedux.org/articles/2015/08/26/creating-an-irb-based-repl-console-for-your-project.html
Hi all. I have a newbie question. I've been googling a lot but maybe I don't understand something. I'm looking for Step reference. I want to know what commands are available (sure you can combine words like (to|on)). I've found this reference https://gist.github.com/bdunn313/4199906 but it's quite old. Or this reference is ok to start?
Alternatively
git clone https://github.com/cucumber/aruba.git
cd aruba
grep -E "When|Given|Then" lib/aruba/cucumber/*.rb | awk -F ":" '{ $1 = ""; print $0}' |sort
Or have a look here https://github.com/cucumber/aruba/blob/master/features/steps/overview.feature I added those tips to the feature test suite of aruba
Hi! I have another question. From the last question I've made a huge step and know Aruba better but can't solve one problem. I can't make to work "When I run
cli interactively" with running a test "in-proccess". Interactively works without "in-proccess" but that's not a solution because I really need it for using webmock. My question is: should it work? If so I will be trying to do it more.
@evmorov Good question. :smile: Looking at the code it should work. But I have never used it this way myself. Do you get any errors or does it simply not work? Can you send me a PR adding a failing test for that to the aruba test suite? Somewhere here https://github.com/cucumber/aruba/blob/master/features/steps/commands/in_process.feature, have a look here as well for some examples https://github.com/cucumber/aruba/blob/master/features/commands/interactive.feature.
I also added tons of feature tests, which can be used as documentation https://github.com/cucumber/aruba/tree/master/features Just look for feature files in the following directories
steps, api.
Which branch should I base my changes on - master?
Yes, please. master is the reference for all PRs.
Quick question if anyone is around - should I expect cucumber/aruba to work with Windows? I have ruby 2.2.3p173 and aruba 0.13.0. When I try to have it run a command, it says that cmd is undefined in the Processes module. I see that he windows build hasn't worked in a while. Should I not be using this?
Great! I think at best would be to have a look at the build logs on AppVeyor first and make sure all existing feature tests are green. A short list of issues I'm aware of.
- File System Modes: Windows only supports something like 644, 666 and so on. It's not that flexible like UNIX
- Runner: Make sure, that all commands can run on windows via cmd.exe (this is partially implemented) + bonus make sure, we can test powershell scripts on windows
- Environment variables: Windows is case in-sensitive regarding environment variables, that's "a problem" because we convert it via with
#to_h. This is partially implemented and needs to be rebased. whichcommand: Make sure command paths can be resolved - this is related to 2. and should be fixed first.- Add some more documentation about how to use
arubaon Windows if needed
I also added a platform tag to our issued tracker: https://github.com/cucumber/aruba/issues?q=is%3Aissue+is%3Aopen+label%3Aplatform%2Fwindows
@dg-ratiodata Had a quick look at the failing Windows specs.
- File System Modes: what is your thought on that? Should we fail if specifying 666 or should it be automagically converted to 644? (BTW, the Windows FS has much better ACLs but they don't work like that)
- Runner: Why do they need to run with cmd.exe? The problem I see is that the tests use
- echo: built-in command
- true: AFAIK it does not exist, but it could be changed
- env: built-in command called set
- cat: AFAIK it does not exist
- shell script to redirect the output of echo to stderr: cmd can do the same
- No comment
- Same as 2., the problem is that the commands do not exist or are built-in
- No comment
- NEW spec/aruba/api/environment/restore_env_spec.rb - wrong number of parameters for delete (2 specs out of 45): fixed in paoloambrosio/aruba@fix-windows-platform.
- NEW spec/aruba/aruba_path_spec.rb:101 - Windows filesystem does not support counting blocks
To fix 2. and 4. I was thinking of re-implementing those commands as Ruby scripts (they are 2 or 3 lines each) to be executed by the specs so that they work in the same way on all platforms.
I believe that 7. should return what Ruby does, so Nil on Windows, and it should be tested.
For 7. I believe that stat on Windows does not expose the block size. From the macro hell that is the filesystem API on the MRI, this might be the data structure used: https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/14h5k7ff.aspx
I would design the test suite assuming that it is run on the standard filesystem for the platform (any "standard" filesystem on Linux and OSX, and NTFS on Windows). For example I wouldn't do anything that might fail in the case-insensitive filesystem in OSX. We should be able to find a representative superset that works on all common combinations of FS and OS.
@paoloambrosio Wow! :smile: Thanks a lot about getting into this. First one quick question: Where do 1., 2. ... refer to? Build errors? About 7: Normally I add things I need myself and think they're useful for others as well, but I can't remember for what project I added the block size thing. But I think I hat in mind, that windows does not support this kind of functionality and should raise "NoImplmented"-error or so.
If you like, send me a PR for your changes. We then can pair on this. Just push the branch to the
aruba/repo.
I'm really glad that you found some time to have a look into this.
I hope we can fix the problems for windows once and for all... at least for the current functionality ;-)
First, I think Aruba tests shouldn't run any apps it doesn't own. This includes using bash, zsh, echo and related for shell. It would be much better to have ruby bash/zsh "shim" that just supports the given "OS feature". The other extreme would be to just run all tests in Docker - which would guarantee consistency without endless workarounds and issues related to "local setup". This is because Travis is not a good place for "development".
For blocks counting on Windows, I'd just either approximate it (cluster size * (1+file_size/cluster + file_count + dir_count)) or expect a tool like du.exe to be installed. (But, for the latter, there's a sever limit to the argument size for a command on Windows, so that complicates things). I'm sure users would prefer an approximation rather than a perfectly accurate implementation no one will ever implement in Ruby...
@dg-ratiodata - it's mostly bugfixes and new features (like Docker), so there shouldn't be any conflicts. If that's an issue, it's best to switch master to 1.x, branch off 0.14 for backporting, and just focus on releasing 1.x ASAP. It's no problem to then work on 2.x a month from now - no one will complain because of "too many major releases". Aruba is complex, so learning is expected. And if learning is reflected in "multiple major releases", that's just an indication of how much learning (or rework) was needed, nothing else. I'm guessing it's actually more useful to just skip to 2.x (master - without releasing), branch off 1.x as unreleased as "work in progress" (too keep the branches). E.g. I'm (as a contributor) only interested in master and not backward compatibility or deprecations - so it makes no sense to add an artificial "burden" on master. You can always work on a "transition release" - but only if there's a genuine need in the community. Master branch should be optimized for quickly accepting PRs. (If PRs don't have priority over other work, contributing feels very discouraging - as if there's a ton of "bureaucracy"). It doesn't make sense to expect contributors to make backports of their own fixes (that they don't need themselves).
@dg-ratiodata - if there's a lot of scrunity for PRs on master (like now), there's no need for a release/1.0.0 branch. Release branches don't fix a discipline/quality problem, they only create a branch managing problem. (Especially if plans aren't communicated to contributors effectively).