Re: [rspec-users] Stories, permissions, authorization rules etc.

2008-12-10 Thread Zach Dennis
On Tue, Dec 9, 2008 at 3:52 AM, Andrew Premdas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > You can improve the features you've given by > > 1. use named routes not url's > 2. not checking for not seeing specific things > 3. A combined step with a more examples table >Given I am logged in as a developer

Re: [rspec-users] Stories, permissions, authorization rules etc.

2008-12-09 Thread Andrew Premdas
You can improve the features you've given by 1. use named routes not url's 2. not checking for not seeing specific things 3. A combined step with a more examples table Given I am logged in as a developer 4. having a general policy for what happens when access fails and testing that e.g.

Re: [rspec-users] Stories, permissions, authorization rules etc.

2008-12-09 Thread Jonathan Linowes
I usually assume my scenario user has been Given permission and instead, I do the authorization testing in the controller specs with shared behaviors, for example, it_should_behave_like "a login required action" it_should_behave_like "a manager authorized action" That said, I also might have

[rspec-users] Stories, permissions, authorization rules etc.

2008-12-08 Thread Alberto Perdomo
Hi, my team and i have come to the point where we have defined a whole bunch of stories for an application. Almost all of the actions (besides login, etc.) should *not* be accesible if not logged in. Almost all of the actions require a specific user role. So, my question is. How do you put that i