The fact that rspec isn’t available seems wrong to me.
So many people use rspec instead of minitest, maybe even maroity
there are options for css, js, db… but not for tests? I bet more people would find rspec more useful than bootstrap.
At least personally, I would find it useful.
So, I’m curious, why not?
Because it’s not the frameworks responsibility to cater to all the options that people want to use.
One your first point, popularity is never a good metric as to wether or not to add something to a framework, it’s actually one of the worst metrics to use.
And on the second one, css, js, db are essential components of building a web app. Testing is essentially optional. Of course it’s a good idea, but it is not required.
It’s also not difficult to install and setup spec. You can even setup rails template to cater things the way you want if you are creating many projects frequently.
Because it’s not the frameworks responsibility to cater to all the options that people want to use.
I thought idea is rails to be a wonderful tool people enjoy to use. “catering to all the options” would be supporting every test framework out there. this isnt it.
One your first point, popularity is never a good metric as to wether or not to add something to a framework, it’s actually one of the worst metrics to use.
there is popularity, and there is utility and ease of use. if the first thing half the users do is disable default option and manually add something else, default isn’t good.
And on the second one, css, js, db are essential components of building a web app. Testing is essentially optional. Of course it’s a good idea, but it is not required.
tailwind, bootstrap aren’t essential, yet options are there. you saying testing is optional, yet rails will generate tests by default, so I disagree.
It’s also not difficult to install and setup spec. You can even setup rails template to cater things the way you want if you are creating many projects frequently.
same can be said about every option, wether it’s adding pg and tweaking database.yml file, or css or js setup. so this argument doesnt make one different from the other.
So with respect, I disagree.
There maybe a solid reason not do it, but at this moment, it seems like the answer is “we just dont want to”, which is fair, but not great.
Then you are starting with an invalid assumption. It in fact does not cater to, nor should it. What your suggesting is madness and has led to the demise of every framework out and programming language that has ever tried to do so.
For further clarification, here’s the official Rails Doctrine on this particular subject.
What your suggesting is madness
just so we’re clear, you’re calling expanding -T option with something like “–test=rspec” madness?
from rails new -h
I just don’t get how “Possible values: rspec” is a bad thing.
Help me understand, please.
I’m under impression that more more developers use rspec more than probably 70% of listed above. That may be wrong, but if it isn’t, what makes those worthy of a cut, but not rspec?
What makes bulma, for example, an option, that rspec doesnt have?