librelist archives

« back to archive

use.no.de (Fwd: [nug] litmus progress)

use.no.de (Fwd: [nug] litmus progress)

From:
Richard Hodgson
Date:
2011-05-02 @ 10:50
Hiya,

So I spent most of yesterday looking at a much simpler design for
use.no.de. http://september.mine.nu/ is stable, feel free to have a
look (I'll work on a different dev instance).

I should stress its a work in progress, need to start working on the
content quite a bit.

Tom, have answered your questions on the wiki...
https://github.com/tomyan/use.no.de/wiki/Redesign-Thoughts

Please push any docs you've got, even if they're half finished.

I can merge to master anytime you like :-)

Richard.

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Tom Yandell <tom@yandell.me.uk>
Date: 2 May 2011 08:10
Subject: Re: [nug] litmus progress
To: nug@librelist.com


Getting slightly off topic, but I also like the docs you get when you
click "getting started". Feel free to yoink parts of the old getting
started with micro and spectrum tutorial into the (currently
non-existant) spectrum part and remove it.
Another thing we could work in somewhere (I'm not sure where) is links
to other projects that work well in conjunction with this set of
technologies:
promised-io
js-signals
jsdoc
socket-io
etc.
Tom

On 2 May 2011 07:58, Tom Yandell <tom@yandell.me.uk> wrote:
>
> Also, let me know when you're ready to merge into the master branch :-)
> Tom
> On 2 May 2011 07:56, Tom Yandell <tom@yandell.me.uk> wrote:
>>
>> To see the docs in more pleasant surroundings:
>> http://september.mine.nu/litmus
>> Thanks Rich, sorry for not waiting for you to mention it, but it looks 
very cool. Only thing i would say is that perhaps the project nav should 
be at the top, but still subsidiary - i.e. not like the main nav, just 
links to other projects? What do you think?
>> Thanks
>> Tom
>>
>> On 2 May 2011 07:25, Tom Yandell <tom@yandell.me.uk> wrote:
>>>
>>> It used to when it was using pkg. Now there are a couple of steps 
necessary to make it work:
>>> * A build system that creates an amd package/packages usable in the browser.
>>> * Work on lib/browser.js (not yet ported from pkg) to load, run and 
display tests in the browser (the planned js-signals integration will make
this more fun).
>>> * A way to load and compose tests into suites that does not use 
synchronous require statements.
>>> This is on my list, but I'd like to spend some time thinking about how
BDD fits into it first. I love gherkin syntax, but think separate features
doesn't make sense for unit tests. Would like to do something like:
>>> this.feature('name of feature', function () {
>>>     /*
>>>         Given ...
>>>         When ...
>>>         Then ...
>>>     */
>>>      // code that tests the feature
>>> });
>>> ..although that's just thinking out loud.
>>> Tom
>>> On 2 May 2011 03:31, Richard Hodgson <rightaboutnow@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hmm...I still don't like testing libraries (like should.js) that
>>>> extend Object - separation is a good thing.
>>>>
>>>> Tom, will Litmus run in both browser and nodejs?
>>>>
>>>> On 2 May 2011 02:07, Michael <micmath@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> > I'm very interested in testing libraries that are easy to run on either:
>>>> > node, rhino, or browser. Also I think the should.js syntax is cool. What
>>>> > makes litmus better/different than, oh say, nodeunit, for example?
>>>> >
>>>> > On 1 May 2011, at 18:21, Tom Yandell <tom@yandell.me.uk> wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> > Have just push changes to use.no.de containing litmus docs. Not finished or
>>>> > published to the site yet, but would still appreciate any feedback:
>>>> > https://github.com/tomyan/use.no.de/blob/master/views/litmus.pub.spv
>>>> > 
https://github.com/tomyan/use.no.de/blob/master/views/litmus/assertions.pub.spv
>>>> > Also, I've sent a pull request to Miller Medeiros for getting JS Signals
>>>> > into NPM. Going to wait for this to happen before integrating with litmus:
>>>> > https://github.com/millermedeiros/js-signals/issues/20
>>>> > https://github.com/millermedeiros/js-signals/issues/21
>>>> > Tom
>>>
>>
>

Re: use.no.de (Fwd: [nug] litmus progress)

From:
Tom Yandell
Date:
2011-05-02 @ 11:03
Cool, I reckon you should merge into master and we'll continue there. Going
out, but happy to put the latest up to the live site later on (maybe
tomorrow).

Tom

On 2 May 2011 11:50, Richard Hodgson <rightaboutnow@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hiya,
>
> So I spent most of yesterday looking at a much simpler design for
> use.no.de. http://september.mine.nu/ is stable, feel free to have a
> look (I'll work on a different dev instance).
>
> I should stress its a work in progress, need to start working on the
> content quite a bit.
>
> Tom, have answered your questions on the wiki...
> https://github.com/tomyan/use.no.de/wiki/Redesign-Thoughts
>
> Please push any docs you've got, even if they're half finished.
>
> I can merge to master anytime you like :-)
>
> Richard.
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Tom Yandell <tom@yandell.me.uk>
> Date: 2 May 2011 08:10
> Subject: Re: [nug] litmus progress
> To: nug@librelist.com
>
>
> Getting slightly off topic, but I also like the docs you get when you
> click "getting started". Feel free to yoink parts of the old getting
> started with micro and spectrum tutorial into the (currently
> non-existant) spectrum part and remove it.
> Another thing we could work in somewhere (I'm not sure where) is links
> to other projects that work well in conjunction with this set of
> technologies:
> promised-io
> js-signals
> jsdoc
> socket-io
> etc.
> Tom
>
> On 2 May 2011 07:58, Tom Yandell <tom@yandell.me.uk> wrote:
> >
> > Also, let me know when you're ready to merge into the master branch :-)
> > Tom
> > On 2 May 2011 07:56, Tom Yandell <tom@yandell.me.uk> wrote:
> >>
> >> To see the docs in more pleasant surroundings:
> >> http://september.mine.nu/litmus
> >> Thanks Rich, sorry for not waiting for you to mention it, but it looks
> very cool. Only thing i would say is that perhaps the project nav should be
> at the top, but still subsidiary - i.e. not like the main nav, just links to
> other projects? What do you think?
> >> Thanks
> >> Tom
> >>
> >> On 2 May 2011 07:25, Tom Yandell <tom@yandell.me.uk> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> It used to when it was using pkg. Now there are a couple of steps
> necessary to make it work:
> >>> * A build system that creates an amd package/packages usable in the
> browser.
> >>> * Work on lib/browser.js (not yet ported from pkg) to load, run and
> display tests in the browser (the planned js-signals integration will make
> this more fun).
> >>> * A way to load and compose tests into suites that does not use
> synchronous require statements.
> >>> This is on my list, but I'd like to spend some time thinking about how
> BDD fits into it first. I love gherkin syntax, but think separate features
> doesn't make sense for unit tests. Would like to do something like:
> >>> this.feature('name of feature', function () {
> >>>     /*
> >>>         Given ...
> >>>         When ...
> >>>         Then ...
> >>>     */
> >>>      // code that tests the feature
> >>> });
> >>> ..although that's just thinking out loud.
> >>> Tom
> >>> On 2 May 2011 03:31, Richard Hodgson <rightaboutnow@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> Hmm...I still don't like testing libraries (like should.js) that
> >>>> extend Object - separation is a good thing.
> >>>>
> >>>> Tom, will Litmus run in both browser and nodejs?
> >>>>
> >>>> On 2 May 2011 02:07, Michael <micmath@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>> > I'm very interested in testing libraries that are easy to run on
> either:
> >>>> > node, rhino, or browser. Also I think the should.js syntax is cool.
> What
> >>>> > makes litmus better/different than, oh say, nodeunit, for example?
> >>>> >
> >>>> > On 1 May 2011, at 18:21, Tom Yandell <tom@yandell.me.uk> wrote:
> >>>> >
> >>>> > Have just push changes to use.no.de containing litmus docs. Not
> finished or
> >>>> > published to the site yet, but would still appreciate any feedback:
> >>>> >
> https://github.com/tomyan/use.no.de/blob/master/views/litmus.pub.spv
> >>>> >
> https://github.com/tomyan/use.no.de/blob/master/views/litmus/assertions.pub.spv
> >>>> > Also, I've sent a pull request to Miller Medeiros for getting JS
> Signals
> >>>> > into NPM. Going to wait for this to happen before integrating with
> litmus:
> >>>> > https://github.com/millermedeiros/js-signals/issues/20
> >>>> > https://github.com/millermedeiros/js-signals/issues/21
> >>>> > Tom
> >>>
> >>
> >
>

Re: use.no.de (Fwd: [nug] litmus progress)

From:
Tom Yandell
Date:
2011-05-02 @ 11:04
Oh yeah, Litmus assertion docs are finished and pushed to master.

Tom

On 2 May 2011 12:03, Tom Yandell <tom@yandell.me.uk> wrote:

> Cool, I reckon you should merge into master and we'll continue there. Going
> out, but happy to put the latest up to the live site later on (maybe
> tomorrow).
>
> Tom
>
>
> On 2 May 2011 11:50, Richard Hodgson <rightaboutnow@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hiya,
>>
>> So I spent most of yesterday looking at a much simpler design for
>> use.no.de. http://september.mine.nu/ is stable, feel free to have a
>> look (I'll work on a different dev instance).
>>
>> I should stress its a work in progress, need to start working on the
>> content quite a bit.
>>
>> Tom, have answered your questions on the wiki...
>> https://github.com/tomyan/use.no.de/wiki/Redesign-Thoughts
>>
>> Please push any docs you've got, even if they're half finished.
>>
>> I can merge to master anytime you like :-)
>>
>> Richard.
>>
>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>> From: Tom Yandell <tom@yandell.me.uk>
>> Date: 2 May 2011 08:10
>> Subject: Re: [nug] litmus progress
>> To: nug@librelist.com
>>
>>
>> Getting slightly off topic, but I also like the docs you get when you
>> click "getting started". Feel free to yoink parts of the old getting
>> started with micro and spectrum tutorial into the (currently
>> non-existant) spectrum part and remove it.
>> Another thing we could work in somewhere (I'm not sure where) is links
>> to other projects that work well in conjunction with this set of
>> technologies:
>> promised-io
>> js-signals
>> jsdoc
>> socket-io
>> etc.
>> Tom
>>
>> On 2 May 2011 07:58, Tom Yandell <tom@yandell.me.uk> wrote:
>> >
>> > Also, let me know when you're ready to merge into the master branch :-)
>> > Tom
>> > On 2 May 2011 07:56, Tom Yandell <tom@yandell.me.uk> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> To see the docs in more pleasant surroundings:
>> >> http://september.mine.nu/litmus
>> >> Thanks Rich, sorry for not waiting for you to mention it, but it looks
>> very cool. Only thing i would say is that perhaps the project nav should be
>> at the top, but still subsidiary - i.e. not like the main nav, just links to
>> other projects? What do you think?
>> >> Thanks
>> >> Tom
>> >>
>> >> On 2 May 2011 07:25, Tom Yandell <tom@yandell.me.uk> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> It used to when it was using pkg. Now there are a couple of steps
>> necessary to make it work:
>> >>> * A build system that creates an amd package/packages usable in the
>> browser.
>> >>> * Work on lib/browser.js (not yet ported from pkg) to load, run and
>> display tests in the browser (the planned js-signals integration will make
>> this more fun).
>> >>> * A way to load and compose tests into suites that does not use
>> synchronous require statements.
>> >>> This is on my list, but I'd like to spend some time thinking about how
>> BDD fits into it first. I love gherkin syntax, but think separate features
>> doesn't make sense for unit tests. Would like to do something like:
>> >>> this.feature('name of feature', function () {
>> >>>     /*
>> >>>         Given ...
>> >>>         When ...
>> >>>         Then ...
>> >>>     */
>> >>>      // code that tests the feature
>> >>> });
>> >>> ..although that's just thinking out loud.
>> >>> Tom
>> >>> On 2 May 2011 03:31, Richard Hodgson <rightaboutnow@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Hmm...I still don't like testing libraries (like should.js) that
>> >>>> extend Object - separation is a good thing.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Tom, will Litmus run in both browser and nodejs?
>> >>>>
>> >>>> On 2 May 2011 02:07, Michael <micmath@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>>> > I'm very interested in testing libraries that are easy to run on
>> either:
>> >>>> > node, rhino, or browser. Also I think the should.js syntax is cool.
>> What
>> >>>> > makes litmus better/different than, oh say, nodeunit, for example?
>> >>>> >
>> >>>> > On 1 May 2011, at 18:21, Tom Yandell <tom@yandell.me.uk> wrote:
>> >>>> >
>> >>>> > Have just push changes to use.no.de containing litmus docs. Not
>> finished or
>> >>>> > published to the site yet, but would still appreciate any feedback:
>> >>>> >
>> https://github.com/tomyan/use.no.de/blob/master/views/litmus.pub.spv
>> >>>> >
>> https://github.com/tomyan/use.no.de/blob/master/views/litmus/assertions.pub.spv
>> >>>> > Also, I've sent a pull request to Miller Medeiros for getting JS
>> Signals
>> >>>> > into NPM. Going to wait for this to happen before integrating with
>> litmus:
>> >>>> > https://github.com/millermedeiros/js-signals/issues/20
>> >>>> > https://github.com/millermedeiros/js-signals/issues/21
>> >>>> > Tom
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >
>>
>
>

Re: use.no.de (Fwd: [nug] litmus progress)

From:
Richard Hodgson
Date:
2011-05-02 @ 19:06
Okies, will merge to master tonight.

Will test on my smartmachine first too.

On 2 May 2011 12:04, Tom Yandell <tom@yandell.me.uk> wrote:
> Oh yeah, Litmus assertion docs are finished and pushed to master.
> Tom
>
> On 2 May 2011 12:03, Tom Yandell <tom@yandell.me.uk> wrote:
>>
>> Cool, I reckon you should merge into master and we'll continue there.
>> Going out, but happy to put the latest up to the live site later on (maybe
>> tomorrow).
>> Tom
>>
>> On 2 May 2011 11:50, Richard Hodgson <rightaboutnow@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hiya,
>>>
>>> So I spent most of yesterday looking at a much simpler design for
>>> use.no.de. http://september.mine.nu/ is stable, feel free to have a
>>> look (I'll work on a different dev instance).
>>>
>>> I should stress its a work in progress, need to start working on the
>>> content quite a bit.
>>>
>>> Tom, have answered your questions on the wiki...
>>> https://github.com/tomyan/use.no.de/wiki/Redesign-Thoughts
>>>
>>> Please push any docs you've got, even if they're half finished.
>>>
>>> I can merge to master anytime you like :-)
>>>
>>> Richard.
>>>
>>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>>> From: Tom Yandell <tom@yandell.me.uk>
>>> Date: 2 May 2011 08:10
>>> Subject: Re: [nug] litmus progress
>>> To: nug@librelist.com
>>>
>>>
>>> Getting slightly off topic, but I also like the docs you get when you
>>> click "getting started". Feel free to yoink parts of the old getting
>>> started with micro and spectrum tutorial into the (currently
>>> non-existant) spectrum part and remove it.
>>> Another thing we could work in somewhere (I'm not sure where) is links
>>> to other projects that work well in conjunction with this set of
>>> technologies:
>>> promised-io
>>> js-signals
>>> jsdoc
>>> socket-io
>>> etc.
>>> Tom
>>>
>>> On 2 May 2011 07:58, Tom Yandell <tom@yandell.me.uk> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > Also, let me know when you're ready to merge into the master branch :-)
>>> > Tom
>>> > On 2 May 2011 07:56, Tom Yandell <tom@yandell.me.uk> wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >> To see the docs in more pleasant surroundings:
>>> >> http://september.mine.nu/litmus
>>> >> Thanks Rich, sorry for not waiting for you to mention it, but it looks
>>> >> very cool. Only thing i would say is that perhaps the project nav should be
>>> >> at the top, but still subsidiary - i.e. not like the main nav, just
links to
>>> >> other projects? What do you think?
>>> >> Thanks
>>> >> Tom
>>> >>
>>> >> On 2 May 2011 07:25, Tom Yandell <tom@yandell.me.uk> wrote:
>>> >>>
>>> >>> It used to when it was using pkg. Now there are a couple of steps
>>> >>> necessary to make it work:
>>> >>> * A build system that creates an amd package/packages usable in the
>>> >>> browser.
>>> >>> * Work on lib/browser.js (not yet ported from pkg) to load, run and
>>> >>> display tests in the browser (the planned js-signals integration will make
>>> >>> this more fun).
>>> >>> * A way to load and compose tests into suites that does not use
>>> >>> synchronous require statements.
>>> >>> This is on my list, but I'd like to spend some time thinking about
>>> >>> how BDD fits into it first. I love gherkin syntax, but think separate
>>> >>> features doesn't make sense for unit tests. Would like to do 
something like:
>>> >>> this.feature('name of feature', function () {
>>> >>>     /*
>>> >>>         Given ...
>>> >>>         When ...
>>> >>>         Then ...
>>> >>>     */
>>> >>>      // code that tests the feature
>>> >>> });
>>> >>> ..although that's just thinking out loud.
>>> >>> Tom
>>> >>> On 2 May 2011 03:31, Richard Hodgson <rightaboutnow@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> Hmm...I still don't like testing libraries (like should.js) that
>>> >>>> extend Object - separation is a good thing.
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> Tom, will Litmus run in both browser and nodejs?
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> On 2 May 2011 02:07, Michael <micmath@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >>>> > I'm very interested in testing libraries that are easy to run on
>>> >>>> > either:
>>> >>>> > node, rhino, or browser. Also I think the should.js syntax is
>>> >>>> > cool. What
>>> >>>> > makes litmus better/different than, oh say, nodeunit, for example?
>>> >>>> >
>>> >>>> > On 1 May 2011, at 18:21, Tom Yandell <tom@yandell.me.uk> wrote:
>>> >>>> >
>>> >>>> > Have just push changes to use.no.de containing litmus docs. Not
>>> >>>> > finished or
>>> >>>> > published to the site yet, but would still appreciate any
>>> >>>> > feedback:
>>> >>>> >
>>> >>>> > https://github.com/tomyan/use.no.de/blob/master/views/litmus.pub.spv
>>> >>>> >
>>> >>>> > 
https://github.com/tomyan/use.no.de/blob/master/views/litmus/assertions.pub.spv
>>> >>>> > Also, I've sent a pull request to Miller Medeiros for getting JS
>>> >>>> > Signals
>>> >>>> > into NPM. Going to wait for this to happen before integrating with
>>> >>>> > litmus:
>>> >>>> > https://github.com/millermedeiros/js-signals/issues/20
>>> >>>> > https://github.com/millermedeiros/js-signals/issues/21
>>> >>>> > Tom
>>> >>>
>>> >>
>>> >
>>
>
>

Re: use.no.de (Fwd: [nug] litmus progress)

From:
Michael Mathews
Date:
2011-05-02 @ 19:07
On Monday, 2 May 2011 at 20:06, Richard Hodgson wrote: 
> will merge to master tonight. 
 Sounds kinky. 

Re: use.no.de (Fwd: [nug] litmus progress)

From:
Tom Yandell
Date:
2011-05-02 @ 20:14
Heh, at least it means I don't need to pull his branch again :-p

Going to upgrade to latest node on my smartmachine, if I remember how...

Tom

On 2 May 2011 20:07, Michael Mathews <micmath@gmail.com> wrote:

>
> On Monday, 2 May 2011 at 20:06, Richard Hodgson wrote:
>
> will merge to master tonight.
>
>  Sounds kinky.
>

Re: use.no.de (Fwd: [nug] litmus progress)

From:
Richard Hodgson
Date:
2011-05-02 @ 20:18
http://wiki.joyent.com/display/node/Setting+the+Node.js+Version

...almost like it uses nave underneath...

On 2 May 2011 21:14, Tom Yandell <tom@yandell.me.uk> wrote:
> Heh, at least it means I don't need to pull his branch again :-p
> Going to upgrade to latest node on my smartmachine, if I remember how...
> Tom
>
> On 2 May 2011 20:07, Michael Mathews <micmath@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> On Monday, 2 May 2011 at 20:06, Richard Hodgson wrote:
>>
>> will merge to master tonight.
>>
>> Sounds kinky.
>