Skip to content

chore(ci): add stage 1 rspec infrastructure#5

Open
blackjid wants to merge 3 commits into
mainfrom
chore/stage1-rspec-ci
Open

chore(ci): add stage 1 rspec infrastructure#5
blackjid wants to merge 3 commits into
mainfrom
chore/stage1-rspec-ci

Conversation

@blackjid

@blackjid blackjid commented Jul 1, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Summary

  • Add minimal Gemfile dependencies (rails, active_admin_resource) so specs can boot
  • Commit Gemfile.lock and pin Ruby 3.4 via .ruby-version
  • Add GitHub Actions CI workflow running bundle exec rspec on push/PR
  • Add bin/ci helper and README instructions for running specs locally

This is stage 1 only: infrastructure to run specs in a single environment. Spec fixes and multi-version matrix come in a follow-up PR.

Test plan

  • CI runs on this PR (expected: specs may fail until stage 2)
  • Locally: bundle install && bundle exec rspec boots the suite on Ruby 3.4
  • bin/ci runs the same command

Made with Cursor

blackjid and others added 3 commits July 1, 2026 11:04
Wire up minimal Gemfile, lockfile, GitHub Actions CI, and bin/ci so
specs can run locally and in CI against a single dependency stack.

Co-authored-by: Cursor <cursoragent@cursor.com>
Wire up budacom/github-actions reusable_claude_review so PRs can get
feedback via @claude mentions and /review comments.

Co-authored-by: Cursor <cursoragent@cursor.com>
ActiveResource object equality is unreliable across query paths.
Assert on record ids and attributes instead so CI passes on Ruby 3.4.

Co-authored-by: Cursor <cursoragent@cursor.com>
@blackjid blackjid force-pushed the chore/stage1-rspec-ci branch from 5533a6c to 5f3c5b6 Compare July 1, 2026 15:13
@blackjid

blackjid commented Jul 1, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Author

@claude /review

@blackjid blackjid requested a review from aundurraga July 1, 2026 15:15
Comment thread Gemfile.lock
PATH
remote: .
specs:
buda_active_resource (1.0.0)

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

aqui no habria que cambiarlo a buda_active_resource?

y en las partes donde esta ActiveAdminResource::Base a BudaActiveResource::Base? porque si no estamos testeando la gema original?

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

mm, este lock esta generado solo al correr bundle instal ( o bundle lock) contra el Gemile.

me pierdo un poco.., BudaActiveResource hay que usarla explicitamente?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants