Actually, I've already made the changes : https://github.com/cpojer/jasmine-node/pull/1 https://github.com/mootools/mootools-runner/pull/2
Still, both of you suggestions won't came in any conflict, only the node runner is impacted by my code. I used https://github.com/larrymyers/jasmine-reporters to serve as junit reporter, and seperate the console reporter from the main node/jasmine file. So, you can add other reporters as well, if you wish to use node. > > You'd be better off making the mootools-runner run under narwhal. I sticked to node, because it's what the runner already use. Still, you can put a runner-narwhal in Runner/, the jasmine-reporters repos from larrymyers is written for rhino so it may be easy to integrate. On 09:56 Wed 03 Nov , Aaron Newton wrote: > Are we assuming that tests that pass on the run server side must therefore > also pass in the browsers? > > On Wed, Nov 3, 2010 at 9:28 AM, Thomas Aylott > <[email protected]>wrote: > > > I'd like that to happen anyway. > > > > — Thomas Aylott – SubtleGradient – MooTools – Cloudera — > > > > On Wed, Nov 3, 2010 at 6:11 AM, Olivier El Mekki <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > The sad thing is it uses rhino and its java bridge to generate the the > > > result file. I'll see if I can convert this to node and integrate into > > > mootools-runner. > > -- Olivier El Mekki.
