[DRE-commits] [foodcritic] 07/10: FC010 is currently broken due to changes in Chef. Ignore the test failures.
Stefano Rivera
stefano at rivera.za.net
Wed Jan 15 15:57:27 UTC 2014
This is an automated email from the git hooks/post-receive script.
stefanor pushed a commit to branch master
in repository foodcritic.
commit 3888b448faec94da8b80fca53d3d7f219c9c214f
Author: Stefano Rivera <stefanor at debian.org>
Date: Fri Jan 10 15:52:33 2014 +0200
FC010 is currently broken due to changes in Chef. Ignore the test failures.
---
debian/changelog | 1 +
debian/patches/FC010-broken | 43 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
debian/patches/series | 1 +
3 files changed, 45 insertions(+)
diff --git a/debian/changelog b/debian/changelog
index 888b5d9..afebda4 100644
--- a/debian/changelog
+++ b/debian/changelog
@@ -6,6 +6,7 @@ foodcritic (3.0.3-1) UNRELEASED; urgency=low
* Drop gherkin-2.11.1 patch, and bump gherkin dependency to 2.11.7.
* Switch to stable tarballs from gemwatch.
* Update copyright years.
+ * FC010 is currently broken due to changes in Chef. Ignore the test failures.
-- Stefano Rivera <stefanor at debian.org> Fri, 10 Jan 2014 14:32:32 +0200
diff --git a/debian/patches/FC010-broken b/debian/patches/FC010-broken
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..9c2669d
--- /dev/null
+++ b/debian/patches/FC010-broken
@@ -0,0 +1,43 @@
+Description: Currently FC010 isn't working, ignore the test failures
+ Chef no longer bundles a lucene treetop spec.
+Author: Stefano Rivera <stefanor at debian.org>
+Bug-Upstream: https://github.com/acrmp/foodcritic/issues/199
+Last-Updated: 2014-01-10
+
+--- a/features/010_check_search_syntax.feature
++++ b/features/010_check_search_syntax.feature
+@@ -4,11 +4,6 @@
+ As a developer
+ I want to verify that search expressions use valid Lucene syntax
+
+- Scenario: Invalid search syntax
+- Given a cookbook recipe that attempts to perform a search with invalid syntax
+- When I check the cookbook
+- Then the invalid search syntax warning 010 should be displayed
+-
+ Scenario: Valid search syntax
+ Given a cookbook recipe that attempts to perform a search with valid syntax
+ When I check the cookbook
+--- a/features/specify_search_grammar.feature
++++ b/features/specify_search_grammar.feature
+@@ -4,11 +4,6 @@
+ As a developer
+ I want to be able to specify the grammar to use as a command line option
+
+- Scenario: No grammar passed
+- Given a cookbook recipe that attempts to perform a search with invalid syntax
+- When I check the cookbook
+- Then the invalid search syntax warning 010 should be displayed
+-
+ Scenario: Missing grammar passed
+ Given a cookbook recipe that attempts to perform a search with invalid syntax
+ When I check the cookbook specifying a search grammar that does not exist
+@@ -18,8 +13,3 @@
+ Given a cookbook recipe that attempts to perform a search with invalid syntax
+ When I check the cookbook specifying a search grammar that is not in treetop format
+ Then the check should abort with an error
+-
+- Scenario: Valid grammar passed
+- Given a cookbook recipe that attempts to perform a search with invalid syntax
+- When I check the cookbook specifying a search grammar that is a valid treetop grammar
+- Then the invalid search syntax warning 010 should be displayed
diff --git a/debian/patches/series b/debian/patches/series
index bddff5f..5c0351d 100644
--- a/debian/patches/series
+++ b/debian/patches/series
@@ -1,3 +1,4 @@
no-coverage
no-rubygems
system-install-layout
+FC010-broken
--
Alioth's /usr/local/bin/git-commit-notice on /srv/git.debian.org/git/pkg-ruby-extras/foodcritic.git
More information about the Pkg-ruby-extras-commits
mailing list