Are you open to include rspec_matchers? about http HOT 18 CLOSED

Was getting some weird errors so I removed you and added you again.

$ gem owner http-rspec --add ixti
You have enabled multi-factor authentication. Please enter OTP code.
Code:   ****
Adding ixti: User has already been taken

$ gem owner http-rspec --remove ixti
You have enabled multi-factor authentication. Please enter OTP code.
Code:   ****
The existing key doesn't have access of remove_owner on RubyGems.org. Please sign in to update access.
   Email:   [email protected]
Password:
Added remove_owner scope to the existing API key
Owner removed successfully.
Owners for gem: http-rspec
- tarcieri
- stoivo

$ gem owner http-rspec --add ixti
You have enabled multi-factor authentication. Please enter OTP code.
Code:   ***
ixti was added as an unconfirmed owner. Ownership access will be enabled after the user clicks on the confirmation mail sent to their email.
Owners for gem: http-rspec
- tarcieri
- stoivo

@ixti, did it work? if not I will send an imail to rubygems

from http.

@ixti, did it work? if not I will send an imail to rubygems

Yup, thank you!

from http.

One alternative is to create a separate gem which has these marchers but I think it would be nice to have it here

from http.

A separate gem with the matchers seems good to me. @ixti what do you think?

from http.

Yeah, I believe separate gem is the best approach.

from http.

Just looked at Rails matcher impementation, we can actually provide 2 methods on response to make it compatible with have_http_status:

alias status_code code

def response_headers
  headers.to_h
end

from http.

That would be an options but we don't know if the user are using or want to include rspec-rails. In this project I do but i see myself using rails less and less when hanami gets better

from http.

If I create a repo with http_rb_rspec gem, with matchers. Would it be okey for it to live in httprb so you could do stuff with it if I'm not available. I can maintain it and release it but I would be nice it could live here to it's yours.

from http.

from http.

I'll create a repo and grant you access today.

from http.

I have the matcher and the gem ready ready. I can't find the invite did you create it?

from http.

I created a repo just to show what I did https://github.com/stoivo/httprb_rspec

from http.

Sorry. Was off the grid a bit. Created http-rspec repo and invited you to it.

A couple of thoughts on that one:

1. I think a better name would be http-rspec (so that it's http gem's name + rspec)
2. Default require should be: require "http/rspec"
3. I believe we can use have_http_status as matcher name, or, to avoid any name conflicts (and deal with conditional proxying) we can have matcher: be_an_http_gem_response.with(status: ...)

from http.

1. Oh, thought I check I thought it was taken. I agree that we should use this name instead.
2. Ok. will fix
3. rspec-rails adds have_http_status to all scoped so we will have to deal with conflict we we use that name. https://github.com/rspec/rspec-rails/blob/71a5751760f64ec86c2c51545c9894abee867d6f/lib/rspec/rails/configuration.rb#L55-L55. I do think be_an_http_gem_response.with(status: ... ) is a bit long, but I will get used to it and I could alias it if I want it to be shorten in one spec. This api also allows easy expansion to check headers and body potentially also be_an_http_gem_request and check headers and body.

from http.

it is released. I don't know how I can make it so you can release it too

from http.

I added ixti and tarcieri so some of you have release access. Somebody else I should add?

from http.

That's fine

from http.

@stoivo can you send me an invite once again? I was off-the grid.

from http.