Defining project_path stuck in recursion

[mptre]

I experienced some difficulties while trying to start the cijoe server on my local machine (OS X). The set call on line 103 got stuck in recursion. This could be solved by passing the third parameter named ignore_setter.

[awd]

Please merge this into master. I also had the same problem, this commit resolved it.

[eyberg]

I had this same problem as well

[marceldegraaf]

+1, same problem here

[marceldegraaf]

FYI: this patch no longer seems to work with Sinatra 1.1.3. Just tried it and got this:

/Users/mdg/.rvm/gems/ruby-1.9.2-p136/gems/sinatra-1.1.3/lib/sinatra/base.rb:865:in `set': wrong number of arguments (3 for 2) (ArgumentError)
    from /Users/mdg/.rvm/gems/ruby-1.9.2-p136/gems/cijoe-0.9.4/lib/cijoe/server.rb:107:in `project_path='
    from /Users/mdg/.rvm/gems/ruby-1.9.2-p136/gems/sinatra-1.1.3/lib/sinatra/base.rb:875:in `set'
    from /Users/mdg/.rvm/gems/ruby-1.9.2-p136/gems/cijoe-0.9.4/lib/cijoe/server.rb:90:in `start'
    from /Users/mdg/.rvm/gems/ruby-1.9.2-p136/gems/cijoe-0.9.4/bin/cijoe:50:in `<top (required)>'
    from /Users/mdg/.rvm/gems/ruby-1.9.2-p136/bin/cijoe:19:in `load'
    from /Users/mdg/.rvm/gems/ruby-1.9.2-p136/bin/cijoe:19:in `<main>'

[yaotti]

+1. This commit resolved the issue for me with sinatra 1.3.1.

[tiagogodinho]

👍

[mptre]

I'm still experiencing the same problem using Sinatra 1.3.1. This commit is yet working as a solution.

[linuxsable]

+1, same issue

[potomak]

+1

[ncreuschling]

+1

[maljub01]

+1

[kenmazaika]

+1

CIJoe was unusable without making this change manually. Once I did it worked. Would be nice to see this in master.

[relrod]

+1...

[stas]

+1

[defrex]

+1

Is this project still maintained? 7 months of people having to manually patch a fundamental fix seems to long.

[potomak]

Maybe not, if you look carefully at project's URL you'll see it says:
defunkt/cijoe
On Apr 23, 2012 8:23 PM, "defrex" <
reply@reply.github.com>
wrote:

+1

Is this project still maintained? 7 months of people having to manually
patch a fundamental fix seems to long.

---

Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
#72 (comment)

[defrex]

You're saying the founder of GitHub has something better to do then patch a CI server that they don't use anymore? To bad, Jenkins is bloated and ugly.

[DNNX]

+1

[prakhar1989]

+1