Jon Rowe
Jon Rowe
Like I said, not sure I like it :P just wanted to put it out there
> Any reason you wouldn't support it in the short term, provided we can find a way to keep full SemVer backwards compatibility? No, as long as we can keep...
> - **Must remain in rspec-mocks**. These matchers need special handling](https://github.com/rspec/rspec-mocks/blob/v3.0.2/lib/rspec/mocks/argument_list_matcher.rb#L49-L50) > in rspec-mocks (as they can't simply match against an object) and only make sense as argument matchers. >...
I mean can we share the same implementation but just have a way of telling it wether to raise or not internally
I'm on board with the mono repo idea, would certainly simplify keeping everything in sync! On the CI side I'd recommend we not split out the various builds into matrices,...
@yujinakayama I think you have permission now
I'm very much in favour of running forward with a monorepo, perhaps as part of the RSpec 4 release process, there will be a lot of massaging PRs and issues...
The main blocker at the moment is the build matrix for the monorepo, I've made good progress on unifying the build I just need to find time to finisht that....
Migrated to the monorepo
:wave: If you wanted to add the failure number to the comment, that seems reasonable, but note it has to be in the comment because those lines are designed to...