Coverage remained the same at 98.999% when pulling 9fe6f0ee12ae72e1d3a5d24a7cab3b312963ab7d on olleolleolle:fix/rakefile-rspec-optional into 92bde9a52d0a93f1b0fb3dc58fe5e665c1401029 on sickill:master.
Coverage remained the same at 98.999% when pulling 2c9dfa1292f3e025f2ce47d7d285e7f1a804a72c on olleolleolle:fix/rakefile-rspec-optional into 92bde9a52d0a93f1b0fb3dc58fe5e665c1401029 on sickill:master.
Coverage remained the same at 98.999% when pulling 2c9dfa1292f3e025f2ce47d7d285e7f1a804a72c on olleolleolle:fix/rakefile-rspec-optional into 92bde9a52d0a93f1b0fb3dc58fe5e665c1401029 on sickill:master.
Coverage remained the same at 98.999% when pulling 2c9dfa1292f3e025f2ce47d7d285e7f1a804a72c on olleolleolle:fix/rakefile-rspec-optional into 92bde9a52d0a93f1b0fb3dc58fe5e665c1401029 on sickill:master.
See #40
This PR changes the Rakefile to make Bundler and RSpec optional. When no RSpec is available, the
spec
task is defined a "no-op" with no output.Here's an example, mentioning the role of Makefile/Rakefile re: "ext": https://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Ruby_Programming/RubyGems#How_to_use_a_Rakefile_instead_of_a_Makefile Thanks to everyone in #40 for being helpful and sharing their findings.
Does this help you folks with the issue?