Both fixed. Thanks again for being our most avid documentation debugger. alex
On Fri, Mar 26, 2010 at 12:07 AM, Peter Schröder <[email protected]> wrote: > i am still working through all the examples in the docs from time to time > to provide some decent examples for our inhouse developers (as can be seen > here http://github.com/phoet/buildr-examples) > and yesterday i was looking into the testing chapter... > > there is no usecase that i can think of for this enhancement. i would > always prefer putting @Ignore annotations directly in my tests instead of > changing the build! > > btw: "But=" in line 3 of the chapter > > kind regards, > peter > > > Am 25.03.2010 um 23:43 schrieb Alex Boisvert: > > > Yeah, sometimes our documentation is a little, ahem, forward-looking. It > > definitely doesn't work on trunk. > > > > I don't know if this worked before and I'm not sure it's a good use-case. > > I'm guessing that if you tried it, it's because there was some appeal to > > it? I'd be curious to understand your motivation. > > > > In any case, the behavior is under-spec'ed right now. It's not clear if > > the block should be called if there's a test failure. And if it should > be > > called if test=all is passed. > > > > I'm open to any interpretation on this. We'll update the doc once we > reach > > a consensus. > > > > alex > > > > On Thu, Mar 25, 2010 at 9:42 AM, Peter Schröder <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> hi, > >> > >> the buildr docs show an example for enhancing the test-task: > >> > >> test do > >> fail 'More than 3 tests failed!' if test.failed_tests.size > 3 > >> end > >> > >> i did not manage to get that one working and i did not see any spec for > the > >> usage. does it really work? > >> > >> kind regards, > >> peter > >
