Use mocha-phantomjs for phantomjs implementation

[kmiyashiro]

Output would allow for CI integration (#45) and way more reporters/flexibility. Need to look into how easy it would be to wrap in a task.

[imawuman]

mocha-phantomjs only supports running 1 test html/url at a time so you would need to take this into consideration. One feature that I like about grunt-mocha that mocha-phantomjs lacks is the filtering out of console.log() messages from the tests themselves

[jackcviers]

@kmiyashiro I could take a look at this if you'd like. From an example on pastebin I don't think it would be too difficult to implement/integrate with this plugin.

[davisford]

Hi, I'm experimenting with both right now. I have both mocha-phantomjs + grunt-mocha-phantomjs working and I also have grunt tasks to run the same tests via grunt-mocha.

Maybe I'm missing something but what is mocha-phantomjs bringing to the table that the current implementation here lacks? I have setup a CI job within Jenkins using the Tap reporter output and it seems to run just fine. The task to execute it is just something like grunt mocha:jenkins >> target\test-results.tap and I specify tap as the reporter in the grunt config. What else would mocha-phantomjs buy me?

Sorry for the questions, but I'm trying to navigate through the sea of many different options.

[imawuman]

how does the tap reporter work for you? #55 i couldn't get that to work

[FoxGit]

Any update on Jenkins integration or code coverage functionality?

[kmiyashiro]

@FoxGit What are you looking for in terms of Jenkins integration? It fails Jenkins builds just fine, are you looking for pretty output? I have not even looked into code coverage yet.

[FoxGit]

Indeed, my bad. Jenkins integration running the tests with phantomjs works just fine. Code coverage capabilities would be most appreciated however. Then you can run your tests in a browser, headless with PhantomJS on the Jenkins AND have a coverage report with one single plugin, that would be awesome!

[jackcviers]

@FoxGit @kmiyashiro There are other tools for code-coverage like mocha-cov
or Istanbul-mocha. Coverage reporting is probably a separate responsibility
from running the specs.
On Jun 20, 2013 2:48 AM, "FoxGit" [email protected] wrote:

Indeed, my bad. Jenkins integration running the tests with phantomjs works
just fine. Code coverage capabilities would be most appreciated however.
Then you can run your tests in a browser, headless with PhantomJS on the
Jenkins AND have a coverage report with one single plugin, that would be
awesome!

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHubhttps://github.com//issues/51#issuecomment-19735716
.

[FoxGit]

I don't think it's a seperate thing. Writing unit tests without knowing about the coverage sounds not right. However there are alternatives of course, I use grunt-mocha-test right know. But as I already use this plug-in an additional coverage feature would be nice to have. :)

[geekdave]

For anyone interested in code coverage enforcement for use with CI systems like Travis and Jenkins, see my comment in issue #44 (comment)