Ryan Davis wrote:
On Aug 19, 2009, at 16:48 , Daniel Berger wrote:
On Wed, Aug 19, 2009 at 4:36 PM, Ryan Davis<ryand-r...@zenspider.com>
wrote:
I just added this to Version:
def assert_spermy expect, version
assert_equal expect, Gem::Version.new(version).spermy_recommendation
end
def test_spermy_recommendation
assert_spermy "~> 1.0", "1"
assert_spermy "~> 1.0", "1.0"
assert_spermy "~> 1.2", "1.2"
assert_spermy "~> 1.2", "1.2.0"
assert_spermy "~> 1.2", "1.2.3"
assert_spermy "~> 1.2", "1.2.3.a.4"
end
The idea being that tools like hoe and rubygems can use it to help
recommend
better dependency specifiers. Right now in hoe if you don't have a
version
specifier on a dependency it tells you that you should at least add
"> 0"
and this would offer a vast improvement. Eventually I'd like to push
rubygems into if not deprecating then at least warning against using
">="
specifiers (when used alone).
See also:
http://blog.zenspider.com/2008/10/rubygems-howto-preventing-cata.html
I also added part of that blog post to the doco on version and
pointed to it
from the top level rdoc.
Good idea, but I can't say I like the name much. I'd like to see it
changed to something like "assert_version_range".
I think you missed the point. assert_spermy is there to illustrate the
API change to Version. I refactored the tests to be readable.
I understand what you're doing. I just don't like the name
"assert_spermy". Can we please change it?
Regards,
Dan
_______________________________________________
Rubygems-developers mailing list
http://rubyforge.org/projects/rubygems
Rubygems-developers@rubyforge.org
http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rubygems-developers
