> Yep, I have the dbs set up right, MySQL 5.1.0 with InnoDB enabled on a fresh
> SuSE 10 box. Most of the tests pass, I'll tinker with it and see what's
> happening.
>
> Curious if anyone on the core team tests outside of OSX? (Meaning, are the
> tests known to pass in a non-osx environment?) The r
Hi Koz,
Yep, I have the dbs set up right, MySQL 5.1.0 with InnoDB enabled on a fresh
SuSE 10 box. Most of the tests pass, I'll tinker with it and see what's
happening.
Curious if anyone on the core team tests outside of OSX? (Meaning, are the
tests known to pass in a non-osx environment?) The rea
Ok, yes, I'll take a look. Incidentally, does anyone know how to
resolve Rendezvous/Bonjour hostnames in Ruby? I tried using the DNSSD
library, but the resolve function doesn't seem to do anything at all.
Kev
On 2/9/06, Michael Koziarski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 2/10/06, Kevin Clark <[EMAIL
On 2/10/06, Bob Silva <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>
> I know this is probably a dumb question, but should all the AR unit tests be
> succeeding for mysql?
They're passing to me, have you run the two drop and recreate scripts
in /test/fixtures/db_definitions?
> Just curious if mysql is designe
On 2/10/06, Kevin Clark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'll give it a shot. Is there a reason we can't load up the individual
> schema to a db and use schema dumper? Clean up if needed?
> Kev
It's also about making sure that the rake test_x loads the schema, and
runs the tests.
But I think you've j
I'll give it a shot. Is there a reason we can't load up the individual
schema to a db and use schema dumper? Clean up if needed?
Kev
On 2/9/06, David Heinemeier Hansson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I've started for a few new tests to use schema.rb instead of creating
> a gazillion changes to all t
I know this is probably a dumb question, but should all the
AR unit tests be succeeding for mysql?
I am running them on 2 separate installs with rake
test_mysql and get similar errors on both.
Just curious if mysql is designed to pass all the tests.
3 of these:
test_lock_col
On 2/7/06, Michael Schoen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Got a handful of pending patches, most of them small tweaks to the
> Oracle adapter. Should be quick work for somebody.
>
>http://dev.rubyonrails.org/ticket/2446
>http://dev.rubyonrails.org/ticket/3210
>http://dev.rubyonrails.org/ti
I've started for a few new tests to use schema.rb instead of creating
a gazillion changes to all the db-specific .sql files. Great stuff.
But it would be even greater if ALL of the db-specific fixtures were
replaced by entries in schema.rb. Should not be a too hard task.
Anyone up for it?
--
David
Sounds logical enough.
I tried to see if the 'trivial' would create conflicts with the trivial
severity option that exists, but the custom search interface is broken with
a missing javascript function so that you cant filter based on attributes of
the ticket.
Bob
-Original Message-
From:
Your guess is as good as mine. Tom Ward did some work based on my
original patch to implement a pooled adaptor which I thought was on
track to be integrated into the core, but i still don't see it in
subversion. We would like to be able to use Rails with webrick in
multithreaded mode for
* Rick Olson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [060209 16:15]:
> Check out the ActionView tests. Here's the tag helper tests, for example:
>
> http://dev.rubyonrails.org/browser/trunk/actionpack/test/template/tag_helper_test.rb
>
> The url_for tests require a controller, so you'll see some of them
> creating
> Talking to yourself, first sign of madness and all that, but instead
> of hastests I propose 'tested', to indicate that the patch has unit
> tests, and that those tests have been run. There's no reason
> submitters shouldn't add this keyword themselves, if they wish.
Tested sounds like a great
On 2/9/06, Rick Bradley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> http://dev.rubyonrails.org/ticket/3775
>
> I'm hoping someone will pop up and tell me I'm simply daft with this
> ticket (and queries on IRC, and a prior post to the main Rails list),
> but I can't get a peep out of anyone so far.
>
> The
http://dev.rubyonrails.org/ticket/3775
I'm hoping someone will pop up and tell me I'm simply daft with this
ticket (and queries on IRC, and a prior post to the main Rails list),
but I can't get a peep out of anyone so far.
The question is, how do I write a simple test for a helper method
> Talking to yourself, first sign of madness and all that, but instead
> of hastests I propose 'tested', to indicate that the patch has unit
> tests, and that those tests have been run. There's no reason
> submitters shouldn't add this keyword themselves, if they wish.
>
> Tom
here's a query for
On Feb 9, 2006, at 9:27 AM, Tom Ward wrote:
On 2/9/06, Tom Ward <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Any suggestions for a better keyword are welcome!
Talking to yourself, first sign of madness and all that, but instead
of hastests I propose 'tested', to indicate that the patch has unit
tests, and th
On 2/9/06, Tom Ward <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Any suggestions for a better keyword are welcome!
Talking to yourself, first sign of madness and all that, but instead
of hastests I propose 'tested', to indicate that the patch has unit
tests, and that those tests have been run. There's no reason
On 2/9/06, Bob Silva <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> r2g and micro are pretty subjective though so I don't see how that helps the
> core members any. They still have to review the patch, write and run unit
> tests and any additional testing they so desire, assuming they can find the
> time to do it.
On Feb 8, 2006, at 7:42 PM, Bob Silva wrote:
If there's anything we can do to assist in managing/filtering the
bugs list,
let us know. I am willing to spend time either creating patches or
researching/adding remarks on tickets to reduce the time you would
need to
investigate it.
Adding re
20 matches
Mail list logo
