Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Delete SpecRunner Jasmine files #10184

Merged
merged 6 commits into from
Mar 10, 2022
Merged

Delete SpecRunner Jasmine files #10184

merged 6 commits into from
Mar 10, 2022

Conversation

ebogo1
Copy link
Contributor

@ebogo1 ebogo1 commented Mar 9, 2022

Another part of #10134 - after this PR the only work left should be to update the Jasmine version we get from npm and clean up our matchers/syntax in specs if needed.

This gets rid of:

  • ThirdParty/jasmine-2.2.0/*
  • Specs/SpecRunner.html
  • Specs/spec-main.js (our modified version of Jasmine's boot.js for browser standalone)
  • Links and references to the SpecRunner

@ebogo1 ebogo1 requested a review from ggetz March 9, 2022 22:20
@cesium-concierge
Copy link

Thanks for the pull request @ebogo1!

  • ✔️ Signed CLA found.
  • CHANGES.md was not updated.
    • If this change updates the public API in any way, please add a bullet point to CHANGES.md.
  • ❔ Changes to third party files were made.
    • Looks like a file in one of our ThirdParty folders (ThirdParty/, Source/ThirdParty/) has been added or modified. Please verify that it has a section in LICENSE.md and that its license information is up to date with this new version.

Reviewers, don't forget to make sure that:

  • Cesium Viewer works.
  • Works in 2D/CV.

gulpfile.cjs Show resolved Hide resolved
@ebogo1
Copy link
Contributor Author

ebogo1 commented Mar 9, 2022

Also - should there be a CHANGES.md entry for this?

@ggetz
Copy link
Contributor

ggetz commented Mar 10, 2022

Also - should there be a CHANGES.md entry for this?

Let's add it for completeness since we removed the test link from index.release.html.

@ggetz
Copy link
Contributor

ggetz commented Mar 10, 2022

Thanks @ebogo1! The functional part of this PR is all working as expected. Let's just make sure the testing guide still has all the necessary info before merging this.

@ebogo1
Copy link
Contributor Author

ebogo1 commented Mar 10, 2022

@ggetz Should be good after 7d5ff56 passes!

@ggetz
Copy link
Contributor

ggetz commented Mar 10, 2022

Looks good! Thanks again @ebogo1 !

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
No open projects
Status: Issue/PR closed
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants