On Apr 27, 2010, at 8:42 AM, John Feminella wrote:
>> There is a general rule of thumb that says "test your code,
>> not everybody else's." This suggests that you don't really
>> need to be testing this. Any reason you feel the need to?
>
> The "specs" task is generated programmatically based on
> There is a general rule of thumb that says "test your code,
> not everybody else's." This suggests that you don't really
> need to be testing this. Any reason you feel the need to?
The "specs" task is generated programmatically based on several
initial conditions, and eventually it will become m
On Apr 26, 2010, at 4:29 PM, John Feminella wrote:
> hi guys,
>
> I'm trying to be diligent about checking my `rake` tasks with RSpec
> tests, but in the process of feeling my way around I seem to have hit
> a wall. I've got a really simple RSpec test that looks like this:
>
># ./test/meta_s
hi guys,
I'm trying to be diligent about checking my `rake` tasks with RSpec
tests, but in the process of feeling my way around I seem to have hit
a wall. I've got a really simple RSpec test that looks like this:
# ./test/meta_spec.rb
describe "Rake tasks" do
require 'rake'
befor
