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

Gauge uses hardcoded specs folder (at least in the logs) #302

Closed
hakito opened this issue Feb 25, 2016 · 3 comments
Closed

Gauge uses hardcoded specs folder (at least in the logs) #302

hakito opened this issue Feb 25, 2016 · 3 comments
Assignees
Labels

Comments

@hakito
Copy link

hakito commented Feb 25, 2016

Though specifying a custom path in tha gauge command for the specs folder

gauge another_specs_folder

The logs indicate it still tries to load specs from a specs folder.

api.log:

02:06:41.492 Unable to add directory C:\work\specs to file watcher: GetFileAttributes: The system cannot find the file specified.

@kaustavdm kaustavdm self-assigned this Mar 8, 2016
kaustavdm pushed a commit that referenced this issue Mar 8, 2016
@kaustavdm kaustavdm added the bug label Mar 9, 2016
kaustavdm pushed a commit that referenced this issue Mar 9, 2016
@kaustavdm
Copy link
Contributor

Changes implemented. As a side effect, there have been 2 changes to gauge's usage:

  1. --daemonize now takes optional arguments for each spec directory that it needs to watch. It defaults to spec as the spec directory if nothing is provided. e.g.

      $ GAUGE_API_PORT=12345 gauge --daemonize spec_dir_1/ spec_dir_2/ spec_dir_3/
  2. --refactor now takes optional arguments for spec directories after specifying step names. e.g.:

      $ gauge --refactor "Old step text" "New step text" spec_dir_1/ spec_dir_2/ spec_dir_3/

@mahendrakariya
Copy link
Contributor

We should have functional tests for this.
Created an issue. getgauge/gauge-tests#11

@mahendrakariya
Copy link
Contributor

More fixes for this issue in abc9058.

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

No branches or pull requests

3 participants