resolves #1022 provide more information about missing font #1045
Conversation
mojavelinux
commented
Nov 8, 2017
mojavelinux
commented
- when an afm font is missing, provide more information to the user
- look for font name in family option in case of missing TTF
mojavelinux
force-pushed
the
issue-1022
branch
from
3d32b79
to
97a39c7
Compare
|
@mojavelinux Could you please fix the build? |
mojavelinux
force-pushed
the
issue-1022
branch
from
97a39c7
to
0752fdd
Compare
|
I forgot to run rubocop. I've addressed the violations. For the record, I have no idea how Travis is running rubocop. When I run it locally, I get 13,000 violations. It would be nice to know what the right command is so I can actually test it locally. |
mojavelinux
force-pushed
the
issue-1022
branch
from
0752fdd
to
8563d8c
Compare
|
Default Rake task is running both Rubocop checks and specs. Use bundler to be sure you're running all the right versions. bundle exec rake |
|
Aha, I had the gem extracted under pkg, which was getting caught up in the glob. I think the glob needs to be more specific because it's including stuff it shouldn't. I took that away and I still get violations. Here's a partial output using Ruby 2.4.1. |
|
Strange. I cloned the project again in a fresh space and then the rubocop passed. I have no idea why I'm getting different results. |
|
I've tried everything I can think of. I don't know why this old checkout is giving me errors. There are no additional files reported by git. Whatever, I'll just clone it again. |
|
You should never use a packaged gem for development. Packaged gem used to be a proper distribution mechanism at the very beginning of Ruby gems but since then it has changed (about 14 years ago when RubyForge came about). Nowadays it's actively discouraged to package supporting infrastructure. Packaged gem should only contain files that are required for proper execution and documentation generation. As for your checkout you may have different version of Rubocop installed. Our config inherits from the default one so somewhat version-dependent. |
|
If I run the tests from /tmp/prawn, I get no violations. If I move the prawn directory into my home directory, then I get violations. So it's clearly looking at parent directories, so it's not really a portable set up. |
|
That's interesting. Rubocop does indeed traverse tree to find config but it should not go all the way tho the |
|
@mojavelinux Do you have a merge bit on this repo? |
|
The problem seems to be that my folder structure is "projects/prawn/prawn". If I rename it to "projects/prawn/prawn-core" then I get no violations. I don't know what the heck is going on there. |
|
But on a different computer, I don't get that problem. It seems like information has been cached somewhere. I just don't know where that is. I'll keep poking at it to see if I can figure out what is causing the delta. |
It appears so, but merging is blocked unless there is one approved review. |
I 100% agree with you. What I meant to say was that I had some junk inside the project left behind when I was looking for something. I should have just said, "I left behind a temporary directory". But that's a separate issue from why I get violations when the folder structure is "projects/prawn/prawn". But I'm willing to say that it's a dirty cache somewhere. |
Indeed. My bad. 😅 |
|
👍 |
|
Regarding rubocop, each computer I try I get different results. If I run |
- when an afm font is missing, provide more information to the user - look for font name in family option in case of missing TTF - add test to confirm error is raised and message is correct
mojavelinux
force-pushed
the
issue-1022
branch
from
8563d8c
to
a7eef4d
Compare
|
I added an entry to the changelog. Could you approve again? |
|
@pointlessone Did you want me to merge? |
|
@mojavelinux Yes, please. |
|
Done! |
