Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jasmine upgrade #412

Merged
merged 10 commits into from
Dec 27, 2012
Merged

Jasmine upgrade #412

merged 10 commits into from
Dec 27, 2012

Conversation

kristiancalhoun
Copy link
Contributor

Upgrade Jasmine from version 1.1.0 to 1.3.0, incorporating our previous changes.

@pjcozzi
Copy link
Contributor

pjcozzi commented Dec 27, 2012

Looks good. All of our changes still work.

Looking forward to adding categories.

pjcozzi added a commit that referenced this pull request Dec 27, 2012
@pjcozzi pjcozzi merged commit 1f95b04 into master Dec 27, 2012
@pjcozzi pjcozzi deleted the jasmine-upgrade branch December 27, 2012 11:49
@shunter
Copy link
Contributor

shunter commented Jan 3, 2013

It looks like both the "debug" links and the link to "select a test to run" were both lost as part of this upgrade. Was that intentional? Apologies for the late comments.

@pjcozzi
Copy link
Contributor

pjcozzi commented Jan 3, 2013

The debug links are still there on each spec, but not a suite.

I'm not sure what the "select a test to run" link was, but we can still click on a spec or suite to run just that.

@mramato
Copy link
Contributor

mramato commented Jan 3, 2013

There both there, but only at the individual test level and not the module
level.

On Thu, Jan 3, 2013 at 2:32 PM, Scott Hunter notifications@github.comwrote:

It looks like both the "debug" links and the link to "select a test to
run" were both lost as part of this upgrade. Was that intentional?
Apologies for the late comments.


Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHubhttps://github.com//pull/412#issuecomment-11857228.

@shunter
Copy link
Contributor

shunter commented Jan 3, 2013

I checked more closely and it turns out that they are present on passing specs, but missing on failed specs, which is actually the only case you want that link. I'll work on fixing it at some point.

@pjcozzi
Copy link
Contributor

pjcozzi commented Jan 3, 2013

Gotcha, submit an issue. This is going to become a problem quickly.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants