Closed sio4 closed 2 years ago
This -m
flag is something I've been thinking about while working on the new CLI architecture. I've been thinking if this is something standard in Go or something that Testify requires and how do we write our CLI so we are not dependent on Testify.
This
-m
flag is something I've been thinking about while working on the new CLI architecture. I've been thinking if this is something standard in Go or something that Testify requires and how do we write our CLI so we are not dependent on Testify.
In our code, the -m
works as two ways.
-testify.m TestCase
flag is used instead -m
itself.-run TestCase
flag is used instead of -m
itself.So what I found for -m
is a kind of meta flag to be transformed into the standard -run
or testify style and I think this method is useful. (Actually, the scaffolded app supports testify)
Was taking the time to review how this impacted the v1 version of all this. Thanks for adding the comments @sio4.
Not sure when the issue started, but
buffalo test -m TEST
was not working as expected. The bug was reported as #180 recently (transferred from thebuffalo
repository).This fix fixes the following things:
.buffalo.dev.yml
existence checking onbuffalo dev
command. The logic should not reach there since therootCmd
checks that before executing subcommands.anywhereCommands
checking.anywhereCommands
means they can be executed outside app root.anywhereCommands
. (maybe related to the above miss-checking?)buffalo test -m
handles argument properly especially withtestify
.fixes #180