Feature #6400

Add Rjb support to ruby-sikuli

Added by intrigeri 2013-11-03 06:37:09 . Updated 2014-11-10 13:33:53 .

Status:
Rejected
Priority:
Elevated
Assignee:
intrigeri
Category:
Target version:
Start date:
2013-11-03
Due date:
% Done:

100%

Feature Branch:
Type of work:
Discuss
Blueprint:

Starter:
0
Affected tool:
Deliverable for:

Description

IIRC anonym already has done it somewhere, but I can’t find the relevant info on the blueprint, and I don’t remember if it’s been submitted upstream yet.

Subtasks

Related issues

Blocked by Tails - Feature #7212: Try running our automated test suite in a Jessie environment Resolved 2014-05-10

History

#1 Updated by bertagaz 2013-11-11 09:22:57

  • Feature Branch set to test/rjb-migration

Anonym did work on that, the features/support/helpers/sikuli_herper.rb helper is now using rjb in the feature branch.

I did test it and sikuli is behaving well. More to come on this.

Regarding upstreaming in the ruby-sikuli gem (mentionned in the blueprint), I’m not sure it is worth the workload, compared to the current situation. It is a bit more work than what we have. That would also mean packaging it in Debian, and get it into Wheezy. We actually have something simple, but for sure something we’ll have to maintain, (althought it might not change a lot).

So shall we close this ticket when the feature branch is merged, or go on with the ruby-sikuli gem option?

#2 Updated by intrigeri 2013-11-11 10:04:58

> Regarding upstreaming in the ruby-sikuli gem, I’m not sure it is worth the workload,
> compared to the current situation. It is a bit more work than what we have.
> That would also mean packaging it in Debian, and get it into Wheezy. We actually have
> something simple, but for sure something we’ll have to maintain, (althought it might
> not change a lot).

> So shall we close this ticket when the feature branch is merged, or go on with the
> ruby-sikuli gem option?

I’m not opposed to trying the “let’s maintain our own Ruby/sikuli
adapter” approach, as long as enough people commit to maintain it.

#3 Updated by intrigeri 2013-12-27 10:35:03

  • Feature Branch deleted (test/rjb-migration)
  • Type of work changed from Code to Discuss

Discussing what we should do on tails-dev (“Please review’n’merge test/rjb-migration” thread).

#4 Updated by intrigeri 2013-12-27 10:35:43

  • Assignee changed from anonym to intrigeri

Taking responsibility to bring this discussion to a conclusion. Oh well.

#5 Updated by intrigeri 2014-02-21 19:51:57

I’ll wait for everyone to be less busy with their 0.23 goals, and then I’ll try to sum up the discussion and lead it to a conclusion.

#6 Updated by intrigeri 2014-03-12 11:16:00

  • Priority changed from Normal to Elevated

#7 Updated by intrigeri 2014-03-20 05:51:40

  • % Done changed from 0 to 10

Summed up current status on tails-dev@, asked the relevant people what they prefer to do. The thread was renamed to “Feature #6400: upstreaming our rjb support”.

#8 Updated by intrigeri 2014-05-12 07:46:25

  • blocked by Feature #7212: Try running our automated test suite in a Jessie environment added

#9 Updated by BitingBird 2014-06-21 13:32:26

  • Target version set to Hole in the Roof

parent ticket is hole in the roof -> target version for the subtasks :)

#10 Updated by intrigeri 2014-07-19 20:17:29

If our stuff works fine on Jessie, then we’ll know that we won’t have to fix our custom adapter for a while, and then we can close this ticket as rejected.

#11 Updated by intrigeri 2014-11-10 13:33:53

  • Status changed from In Progress to Rejected
  • Target version deleted (Hole in the Roof)
  • % Done changed from 10 to 100

It seems that our Sikuli stuff works fine on Jessie (Bug #8265), so closing.