bower support

[cellvia]

does not break any tests (that werent already broken)

added new set of tests into separate test file -- may be overkill if you want to remove some, or consolidate no problem w/ that from my end

references https://github.com/atomify/atomify-css/issues/29

[cellvia]

sorry, this added a duplicate of rework-clone in the test folder, which is unnecessary. removing and committing.

[cellvia]

let me know if you'd like me to redo the PR to avoid that extra commit or change anything else to get this in

[joeybaker]

Nifty. A few questions:

1. Is it necessary to checkin all of bower_components? Can we git ignore them, and run a bower install as a prereq of these tests?
2. Is it necessary to duplicate all the tests? Is there a slimmer test suite that still covers our bases?

[cellvia]

thanks for taking a look :-)

re: 1) they are basically duplicates of the node modules you guys had checked in the tests, just modified to be bower components... they dont actually exist in the bower registry or anything. is there a way in general to collapse a file structure into a scaffolding build script? such would be equally cool to apply to the checked in node_modules ? seems like a lot of work though :-/

re: 2) probably so, import type should only affect a few key tests realistically. want me to take a stab at slimming it? if its small enough i'll just put them straight into test.js. though that scaffold of bower_components files is necessary for one of the most troublesome issues w/ this PR: integrating rework plugins (which are node_modules that live INSIDE bower components) hence the need for the intricate scaffold

[joeybaker]

Thanks for the PR :)

1. hmm… could a symlink do the trick?
2. If you wouldn't mind, yes, a slimmed down test suite would be ideal. I'd love not to have to duplicate tests all the time!

[cellvia]

whew well... i could use this: https://github.com/BenJanecke/sane-scaffold

and create a symlink to the build script, shall i put that in /bin ? also what would you like the command to be... buildbower ?

i dont mind slimming down the test suite...the harder part is the above ;-) so if i do these things we are greenlight on the PR ?

[joeybaker]

Yup! We'd like to merge this, just need those two things fixed.

[cellvia]

Ok, last thing, perhaps i should make the bower test file generated separately (test-bower.js perhaps) otherwise the bower tests within test.js will always fail until bowerbuild is run...

[joeybaker]

hmmm… can you have the bower test file run bowerbuild?

[cellvia]

i suppose so, and create a script in the package.json thats like npm run bower-test ?

[cellvia]

updating the bower tests later would not be fun this route however

[cellvia]

theyd be stored as a string in this /bin file (thats how the scaffolding works)

[joeybaker]

You could modify npm test in the package.json to run bowerbuild?

[cellvia]

oh yeah, thats true... would you be ok with that?

[joeybaker]

does bowerbuild cache its result?

[cellvia]

im not sure what you mean... it uses that scaffold script to modify the filesystem in place, adding bower components folders into the fixtures folders...

[cellvia]

hope that works here cause i just did a painstaking code streak just for this! i tested the output and all the tests pass on it. just need to figure out the right way to build it out. im sensing you want it to be totally optional, so perhaps i can have the separate test-bower.js file, but trim it down, and running it (node test-bower.js) will scaffold the files, and then run the test. this will avoid the bin folder / symlink as well. all you'd need is the test-bower.js file.

[joeybaker]

You're right. We want it totally optional, but we do want to run the necessary tests on every test run. I'm fine with having a separate test/bower.js file, but I'd like to avoid having it straight-up duplicate every test. Ideally, it would just run test to ensure that the bower layer works. What do you think?

[cellvia]

to get the closest to that ideal, i am seeing two options:

1) symlink bowerbuild, then have the npm test script be: bowerbuild && tape test.js | tspec then it will build the files, and test.js can then include the much slimmed down bower tests (probably 3 or 4 max)

2),another idea you suggested, have bowerbuild invoked within test.js itself before running the tests. this avoids the need to symlink and avoids altering npm test

either one will build the bower components into the fixtures folder upon running the tests... both will make it optional in that you have to run the test for the build to happen.

does this sound about right?

any preference which one? thanks for the time and thoughtfulness!

[joeybaker]

My preference is for whichever one is faster on multiple runs :)

[cellvia]

this should be good to go now...

[techwraith]

@joeybaker can you take another look at this one?

@cellvia Can you get this mergable again, I think Joey swapped some code out from under you ;)

[joeybaker]

@cellvia just ping me when this is mergable again. I'd be happy to take another pass.

[cellvia]

@joeybaker done :-)

[cellvia]

Any luck???

[cellvia]

requests honored! (with minor exceptions, see notes above) PS i tested this in windows, and bowerbuild is properly creating the folder structures! also to note... while atomify-css fails most of the tests on the windows side, it seems at least like the bower tests are failing in line with the normal tests ie simply due to line break differences between windows and unix

[joeybaker]

Thanks all the work @cellvia!

Windows is a tough one. I'll open an issue so we can track that.

Merging!