buildr-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Daniel Spiewak <djspie...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: svn commit: r930784 - in /buildr/trunk: CHANGELOG lib/buildr/scala/bdd.rb
Date Mon, 05 Apr 2010 05:06:37 GMT
While I agree that 2.8 should be our primary focus, I think it's important
to note that 2.7 isn't going away any time soon.  A lot of companies which
have adopted Scala (such as Novell, where I work) are stuck on 2.7 for the
next several months, if not longer (unfortunately).  That's just the nature
of software release cycles.

With that said, I'm not advocating any special pains to stick with 2.7.  I'm
simply pointing out that we're in a situation where we have to choose
between two frameworks, one of which will work by default, while the other
will require extra effort from the user.  Right now, ScalaTest works by
default because we have stuck with an old version of ScalaCheck, one which
is compatible with it.  However, Specs does not work with the same version
of ScalaCheck because it was designed to be compatible with a more recent
one.  So, we're really in an "either/or" sort of situation.

Given that the choice is really between two frameworks, I think the only way
to decide is to just pick the more up-to-date version of ScalaCheck (which
is the one compatible with Specs).  I think this makes sense because the
problem is stemming from the fact that ScalaTest has *not* kept up
compatibility with the latest releases, and so really the burden of
operation rests with it.  We can just add a note or something that users who
want to use ScalaTest with ScalaCheck will need to explicitly set their
ScalaCheck version to 1.5.

Daniel

On Sun, Apr 4, 2010 at 11:23 PM, Alex Boisvert <alex.boisvert@gmail.com>wrote:

> As scary as this may seem, I've migrated all my projects to Scala 2.8 and
> self-compiled versions of ScalaTest and ScalaCheck for 2.8 and I'm a happy
> camper.    (I don't use Specs anymore since ScalaTest has introduced
> WordSpec)
>
> I suspect our time is better invested in ensuring things work on 2.8 when
> the release settles down than trying to get 2.7 working perfectly.    I
> doubt we'll get much support from the Scala crew at EPFL fixing issues on
> 2.7.
>
> My $0.02,
> alex
>
>
> On Sun, Apr 4, 2010 at 8:30 PM, Daniel Spiewak <djspiewak@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > That's it.  However, I have since discovered that the issue seems to be
> > 100%
> > repeatable and isn't dependent on any weird use of the integration.  Even
> > the simplest of Specs+ScalaCheck tests cause the Scala 2.7.7 compiler to
> > crash when using Specs 1.6.2 and ScalaCheck 1.5.  Things work just fine
> > with
> > ScalaCheck 1.6.
> >
> > Daniel
> >
> > On Sun, Apr 4, 2010 at 10:27 PM, Antoine Toulme <antoine@lunar-ocean.com
> > >wrote:
> >
> > > That's the problem you describe with
> > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BUILDR-410, right ?
> > >
> > > On Sun, Apr 4, 2010 at 20:24, Daniel Spiewak <djspiewak@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > > We *need* to address the issue of the ScalaCheck version, which is
> > > woefully
> > > > outdated and quite incompatible with Specs (and Scala 2.7.7 for that
> > > > matter).  I seem to recall that the current version (1.6) is
> > incompatible
> > > > with ScalaTest 1.0, but since ScalaTest hasn't made a release since
> > Scala
> > > > 2.7.3, I'm starting to wonder if it's worth holding back our support
> > for
> > > > other frameworks just to keep it working out of the box.  Users can
> > > always
> > > > set the scalacheck.version property (as they are currently forced to
> do
> > > if
> > > > they want to use Specs).  What say you?
> > > >
> > > > Daniel
> > > >
> > > > On Sun, Apr 4, 2010 at 9:20 PM, <boisvert@apache.org> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Author: boisvert
> > > > > Date: Mon Apr  5 02:20:17 2010
> > > > > New Revision: 930784
> > > > >
> > > > > URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=930784&view=rev
> > > > > Log:
> > > > > Upgrade to Scala Specs 1.6.2.1
> > > > >
> > > > > Modified:
> > > > >    buildr/trunk/CHANGELOG
> > > > >    buildr/trunk/lib/buildr/scala/bdd.rb
> > > > >
> > > > > Modified: buildr/trunk/CHANGELOG
> > > > > URL:
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/buildr/trunk/CHANGELOG?rev=930784&r1=930783&r2=930784&view=diff
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> ==============================================================================
> > > > > --- buildr/trunk/CHANGELOG (original)
> > > > > +++ buildr/trunk/CHANGELOG Mon Apr  5 02:20:17 2010
> > > > > @@ -41,7 +41,7 @@
> > > > >  * Change: Updated to JUnit 4.7
> > > > >  * Change: Updated to JMock 2.5.1 (Antoine Toulme)
> > > > >  * Change: Updated to RJB 1.2.0
> > > > > -* Change: Updated to Scala Specs 1.6.2
> > > > > +* Change: Updated to Scala Specs 1.6.2.1
> > > > >  * Change: Load buildr.rb from $HOME/.buildr instead of $HOME
> > > > >           ($HOME/buildr.rb is still loaded with deprecation
> warning)
> > > > >  * Change: BUILDR-400 Don't forbid projects to use their own
> compiler
> > > > after
> > > > > one has been guessed
> > > > >
> > > > > Modified: buildr/trunk/lib/buildr/scala/bdd.rb
> > > > > URL:
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/buildr/trunk/lib/buildr/scala/bdd.rb?rev=930784&r1=930783&r2=930784&view=diff
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> ==============================================================================
> > > > > --- buildr/trunk/lib/buildr/scala/bdd.rb (original)
> > > > > +++ buildr/trunk/lib/buildr/scala/bdd.rb Mon Apr  5 02:20:17 2010
> > > > > @@ -32,7 +32,7 @@ module Buildr::Scala
> > > > >     @lang = :scala
> > > > >     @bdd_dir = :spec
> > > > >
> > > > > -    VERSION = '1.6.2'
> > > > > +    VERSION = '1.6.2.1'
> > > > >
> > > > >     class << self
> > > > >       def version
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message