gmane.comp.lang.ruby.rails.core

How can I enable assets minifying in development environment?

Rodrigo Rosenfeld Rosas — 2012-05-24T16:30:02

I was trying an concept and found an weird issue when trying to enable 
compression in my development environment.

I'd like to be able to run my specs on the minified versions as well, 
so, using my rails_sandbox_jasmine gem, I'd like to use it this way:

SIMULATE_PRODUCTION=1 rake sandbox_assets:serve

And in my development.rb, I've set it to:

   config.assets.js_compressor = :uglifier
   config.assets.compress = !!ENV['SIMULATE_PRODUCTION']
   config.assets.digest = !!ENV['SIMULATE_PRODUCTION']
   config.assets.debug = !ENV['SIMULATE_PRODUCTION']

The debug (concatenation) and digest feature work but the generated 
assets are not minified.

Is that expected?

Thanks in advance,
Rodrigo.

Re: Engine's Application Controller

Scott Johnson — 2012-05-24T14:53:16

Insert some warning about why it would be better to change the code in your main app here.  But, if you want to change it in your engine you can.  Something like

class  ::Admin::ApplicationController
  # do your monkey patching here
end

Just make sure this is in a file that gets loaded when your engine loads -- I would suggest an initializer, but ...

Sent from my iPhone

On May 24, 2012, at 9:06 AM, Luís Ferreira <zamith.28< at >gmail.com> wrote:

Re: Simple idea for simplifying client-side code test built-in in Rails

Rodrigo Rosenfeld Rosas — 2012-05-24T14:07:11

Here is an example of what I was talking about. Framework agnostic and 
easy to extend:

https://github.com/rosenfeld/rails-sandbox-assets

As you can see, adding support for the Jasmine test runner on top of the 
gem above is pretty simple:

https://github.com/rosenfeld/rails_sandbox_jasmine

Any chances of getting something like this built into Rails 4?

Cheers,
Rodrigo.

Em 23-05-2012 00:05, Rodrigo Rosenfeld Rosas escreveu:

Re: Engine's Application Controller

Luís Ferreira — 2012-05-24T14:06:14

Ok. I get it. It would really be a mess when you have multiple engines, I'll namespace everything in the engine. Thanks.

Still, this won't solve my cancan problem.


On May 24, 2012, at 3:03 PM, Scott Johnson wrote:


Cumprimentos,
Luís Ferreira

Re: Engine's Application Controller

Scott Johnson — 2012-05-24T14:03:43

If you just merged the ApplicationControllers, then the code in the last loaded engine would take precedence in the main app and all other engines.  And if you overwrote some methods in one engine and others in another you would quickly have a quagmire.

Using inheritance provides a nice predictable way to change behavior.  This way you main application stays unaltered and each engine can access this code and change its behavior without affecting the main app or other engines.

Sent from my iPhone

On May 24, 2012, at 8:31 AM, Luís Ferreira <zamith.28< at >gmail.com> wrote:

Re: Engine's Application Controller

Luís Ferreira — 2012-05-24T13:57:42

Ok. So now I've namespace my ApplicationController like so:

class Citygate::Admin::ApplicationController < ::Admin::ApplicationController
  protect_from_forgery
  layout 'admin/application'

  rescue_from CanCan::AccessDenied do |exception|
    redirect_to root_url, :alert => exception.message
  end
end

The problem here is that I want the app/admin/application_controller.rb to be able to change the cancan redirect and since the engine's controller inherits from it, the engine's definitions will always take precendence. This is not the functionality I want. I want to be able to provide some defaults in the engine that can be overidden in the app.

Am I doing anything wrong here?


On May 23, 2012, at 11:49 PM, Ryan Bigg wrote:


Cumprimentos,
Luís Ferreira

Re: Engine's Application Controller

Luís Ferreira — 2012-05-24T13:31:55

Ok. This will solve the problem, but still I don't understand why both application controllers could not be merged.
On May 23, 2012, at 11:49 PM, Ryan Bigg wrote:


Cumprimentos,
Luís Ferreira

Re: Engine's Application Controller

Ryan Bigg — 2012-05-23T22:49:15

Indeed, the application's app/controllers/application_controller.rb will take precedence over a similarly named file in the engine. The same goes for anything else in the app directory, too.

This is why you namespace your engine: to avoid collisions such as these.   


On Thursday, 24 May 2012 at 4:46 AM, Luís Ferreira wrote:

Re: Engine's Application Controller

markmcspadden — 2012-05-23T20:17:13

See previous discussion on this thread:
https://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core/browse_thread/thread/449521aed8b4cd7a#

That thread did result to this change in the guides:
https://github.com/rails/rails/commit/a0d9b7903588cd988c8c9b4164494c792344f43e

Hope that helps.

Mark

On May 23, 1:46 pm, Luís Ferreira <zamith...< at >gmail.com> wrote:

Engine's Application Controller

Luís Ferreira — 2012-05-23T18:46:50

Hi,

I've been using rails 3 engines and (at least in my experience) the engine's application controller is overidden by the app's application controller. Wouldn't it be better if the app would just load on top of the engine? 

I mean that if an engine's application controller has methods or anything else that does not collide with the stuff defined with the app, couldn't it be used?

Isn't this the default behaviour of ruby, that you can just reopen a class and add methods to it possibly overriding them but not deleting the rest of the class?


Regards,
Luís Ferreira

Re: Having 2 ActiveRecord test failures on master: "Errors running test_postgresql" using pg 9.1

Patrick Mahoney — 2012-05-23T15:01:03

A pull request of mine seems to have triggered these failures.  Sorry about 
that.

But I now think the problem is unrelated to my patch since I can reproduce 
on master (where the patch was reverted) with both sqlite3 and postgres 
with this command:

    ruby -w -I"lib:test" -e '["test/cases/associations/eager_test.rb", 
"test/cases/associations/join_model_test.rb", 
"test/cases/base_test.rb"].each { |f| load f }'

Can anyone else reproduce this?

See https://github.com/rails/rails/pull/6416#issuecomment-5871744

Re: Having 2 ActiveRecord test failures on master: "Errors running test_postgresql" using pg 9.1

P . — 2012-05-23T14:42:15

A pull request of mine seemed to trigger this problem.  Sorry about that.

However, I am able to reproduce the problem with both sqlite3 and 
postgresql on master (where my patch has been reverted) like this:

    activerecord$ ruby -w -I"lib:test" -e 
'["test/cases/associations/eager_test.rb", 
"test/cases/associations/join_model_test.rb", 
"test/cases/base_test.rb"].each { |f| load f }'

So I think there are some assumptions in the tests that aren't true 
depending on test order or something else. 
 See https://github.com/rails/rails/pull/6416#issuecomment-5871744

Can anyone else reproduce?

Re: Simple idea for simplifying client-side code test built-in in Rails

Steve Klabnik — 2012-05-23T15:06:26

+1 from me. Rails did a lot to bring testing to web apps, people are
now doing JS testing, we should have some kind of JS story.

Re: Update Rails on Rack documentation

Rafael Magaña — 2012-05-23T03:21:29

I made an initial pull request already: 
https://github.com/rails/rails/pull/6454.

What do you guys think?

On Thursday, May 17, 2012 3:23:10 AM UTC-5, Rafael Magaña wrote:

Simple idea for simplifying client-side code test built-in in Rails

Rodrigo Rosenfeld Rosas — 2012-05-23T03:05:19

A while ago I started a topic here asking for including any framework 
for testing client-side code built into Rails and integrated to 
generators as well.

Rails 4 would be a great opportunity for including such a feature.

By that time, most (including me) have suggested Jasmine as such a 
framework. But actually I don't really care which framework would be 
chosen as it could be easily replaced.

For example, it is pretty clear for me that Konacha has set the proper 
way of dealing with such kind of tests:

https://github.com/jfirebaugh/konacha

Basically its approach is to provide two useful tasks:

konacha:serve - starts an isolated application sharing the asset 
pipeline for in-browser test runner;
konacha:run - suitable for CI, although I'm still not sure what approach 
to take for implementing such task, so this could be added in the 
future, after the other task, which approach is more obvious to opt for.

But it has a single issue that is too easy to be fixed - it is not 
framework agnostic:

https://github.com/jfirebaugh/konacha/issues/37

If Rails provided the idea used by Konacha built in, but providing hooks 
so that other gems could easily set up the template for their JavaScript 
runners, this would be a great solution to client-side integrated test 
solution.

Rails wouldn't even have to add support for common libraries, like 
Sinon.js or Jasmine. It could include any test runner.

For example, since Rails opts for test/unit assertions style as well as 
jQuery as default choices, it would make sense to keep with that style 
by choosing QUnit, which is also developed by the jQuey team and uses 
the assertions style:

https://github.com/jquery/qunit
http://docs.jquery.com/QUnit

I wouldn't use the default QUnit in the same way I don't use test/unit 
for my Ruby tests, but it should be trivial to just add a gem composed 
by one or two files that would enable me to use Jasmine while taking 
advantage of the assets pipeline.

Of course I can already have something like this working in current 
Rails, but the approach taken by Konacha seems so straightforward, clean 
and simple to me that it seems that every runner should take a similar 
approach basically changing only some settings like the template of the 
runner as well as the pattern where to look for test files.

It doesn't make sense for all similar gems to rewrite all the common 
infrastructure. And it would be great to transmit the idea that 
client-side code testing is as much important as server-side testing.

Actually chances are that client-side code will be more and more 
important as time passes. And still, Rails seems to be ignoring that by 
not providing tests for the CoffeeScript generated assets.

I wasn't sure about what approach to take at the time I first proposed 
including any JavaScript testing framework into Rails, but now I'm 
pretty convinced that Konacha's simple approach is the correct one to take.

We would just need to add some hooks to make it framework-agnostic, and 
that shouldn't be hard to do.

Any thoughts about this?

Kind regards,
Rodrigo.

Re: Having 2 ActiveRecord test failures on master: "Errors running test_postgresql" using pg 9.1

Carlos Antonio da Silva — 2012-05-22T04:59:16

Hey Steve, 

I just want to add a comment that this is the first failing build with this particular problem: http://travis-ci.org/#!/rails/rails/builds/1391490. From here you can see the commit.

It's also worth mention that if you're working on any other change, you can send it as a separate pull request, no need to include "fixing the build" with it.

Thanks!

Re: Having 2 ActiveRecord test failures on master: "Errors running test_postgresql" using pg 9.1

Steve Jorgensen — 2012-05-22T00:47:36

Thanks very much for the info and pointers, Prem. Since it's a PostgreSQL 
adapter improvement that I'm working on, I'll give those failing tests some 
attention as well.

On Monday, May 21, 2012 5:34:38 PM UTC-7, Prem Sichanugrist wrote:

Re: Having 2 ActiveRecord test failures on master: "Errors running test_postgresql" using pg 9.1

Prem Sichanugrist — 2012-05-22T00:34:38

Hey Steve,

Sad, but true, that sometime our test suite is not always green. You can verify the state of the test suite at Travis-CI website: http://travis-ci.org/#!/rails/rails

Also, according to latest build, the test cases are indeed failing: http://travis-ci.org/#!/rails/rails/builds/1394984 I don't think anybody is fixing it right now, according to the rails issues list (https://github.com/rails/rails/issues) so good luck :)

Thanks,

Prem

On May 21, 2012, at 7:35 PM, Steve Jorgensen wrote:

Having 2 ActiveRecord test failures on master: "Errors running test_postgresql" using pg 9.1

Steve Jorgensen — 2012-05-21T23:35:11

Hi all,

I'm working on an ActiveRecord contribution, and I seem to be set up to run 
tests properly, but I have 2 failures occurring when I run `rake test` from 
within /activerecord. I am running PostgreSQL 9.1, so perhaps there is 
currently a problem running tests against that?

Has anyone else tried running these tests using PostgreSQL 9.1, and if so, 
do you see the same failures I'm seeing?

If this is a 9.1 problem, then I'll be happy to investigate it as part of 
the contribution I'm working on, but I would first want to make sure that 
really is the problem I'm seeing, and it's not caused by some other thing 
I've messed up with my configuration or process.

Here is the failure output...

  1) Failure:
test_eager_loading_with_conditions_on_join_model_preloads(EagerAssociationTest) 
[/Users/FileVault/stevej/Projects/rails/activerecord/test/cases/associations/
*eager_test.rb:1015*]:
*4 instead of 2 queries were executed*.
Queries:
SELECT "authors".* FROM "authors" INNER JOIN "posts" ON "posts"."author_id" 
= "authors"."id" INNER JOIN "comments" ON "comments"."post_id" = 
"posts"."id" WHERE (posts.title like 'Welcome%')
            SELECT COUNT(*)
            FROM pg_class c
            LEFT JOIN pg_namespace n ON n.oid = c.relnamespace
            WHERE c.relkind in ('v','r')
            AND c.relname = $1
            AND n.nspname = ANY (current_schemas(false))

            SELECT a.attname, format_type(a.atttypid, a.atttypmod), 
d.adsrc, a.attnotnull, a.atttypid, a.atttypmod
              FROM pg_attribute a LEFT JOIN pg_attrdef d
                ON a.attrelid = d.adrelid AND a.attnum = d.adnum
             WHERE a.attrelid = '"author_addresses"'::regclass
               AND a.attnum > 0 AND NOT a.attisdropped
             ORDER BY a.attnum

SELECT "author_addresses".* FROM "author_addresses"  WHERE 
"author_addresses"."id" IN (1).
Expected: 2
  Actual: 4

  2) Failure:
test_custom_primary_key_on_new_record_should_fetch_with_query(HasManyAssociationsTest) 
[/Users/FileVault/stevej/Projects/rails/activerecord/test/cases/associations/
*has_many_associations_test.rb:1342*]:
*2 instead of 1 queries were executed*.
Queries:
            SELECT COUNT(*)
            FROM pg_class c
            LEFT JOIN pg_namespace n ON n.oid = c.relnamespace
            WHERE c.relkind in ('v','r')
            AND c.relname = $1
            AND n.nspname = ANY (current_schemas(false))

SELECT COUNT(*) FROM "essays"  WHERE "essays"."writer_id" = $1 AND 
"essays"."writer_type" = $2.
Expected: 1
  Actual: 2

Thanks,

Re: Original MySQL Adapter

Erich Menge — 2012-05-18T21:19:53

Didn't notice that!  I was going to offer to do it, but I guess
someone beat me to it.

Thanks Carlos.

On May 18, 8:15 am, Carlos Antonio da Silva
<carlosantoniodasi...< at >gmail.com> wrote:

Re: Original MySQL Adapter

Carlos Antonio da Silva — 2012-05-18T13:15:31

Hey Erich, there's a discussion on this here: https://github.com/rails/rails/pull/6030, you can add any comment there if you want. Thanks!