RuboCop required dependency about rainforest

[alloy]

Sigh. This happens because the RuboCop constant is used when reading the Rakefile, so this line should probably also rescue missing constants:

rescue LoadError, NameError => e

[ashfurrow]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-rPEguSf35c

[alloy]

It’s interesting that this require statement does not make the RuboCop constant available.

[segiddins]

It does, I think...

[fabiopelosin]

The issue is that the Rubocop constant was renamed to RuboCop, in a past version of the gem.

Rainforest doesn't have a Gemfile and this leads to Ruby using the gems that it has installed instead of the ones of the bundle of each single repo.

A solution could be to use bundle exec in the https://github.com/CocoaPods/Rainforest/blob/master/Rakefile#L89 line:

      Dir.chdir(dir) do
        subtitle "Bootstrapping #{dir}"
        if has_rake_task?('bootstrap')
          sh "bundle exec rake --no-search bootstrap"
        end
      end

However this solution, at least as proposed, is not working:

/Users/fabio/.rbenv/versions/2.1.2/bin/rake:23:in `load': cannot load such file -- /Users/fabio/.rbenv/versions/2.1.2/lib/ruby/gems/2.1.0/specifications/default/bin/rake (LoadError)
    from /Users/fabio/.rbenv/versions/2.1.2/bin/rake:23:in `<main>'
rake aborted!

[alloy]

We should’t use bundle exec for bootstrapping in the first place, that’s what the whole bootstrap vs other gems+rescue is about: so that you can run the bootstrap task, even if the bundle hasn’t been installed.

[alloy]

Btw, this has been fixed on the Xcodeproj rep, not sure why it’s still open here.

[fabiopelosin]

Good call, I remember that I explored a couple of approaches but I wasn't satisfied with any.

Anyway the issue might not be completely solved. Other exceptions than name errors which might arise from the versions of the gems of the bundle not being the same as the ones of the ruby installation are not catched. However I propose to keep this closed for lack of better solution (also our coverage in the real world should be pretty high with this one).

[alloy]

The only proper solution is to not rely on RuboCop to define the rake task, but just define a rake task ourselves and lazily load RuboCop from there once needed.

The RuboCop task is most probably an over-engineered feature anyways, I rarely come across tasks that couldn’t simply be defined manually.

[fabiopelosin]

👍