will do, apologies for reintroducing them.  It was basically unintentional.
I had them left over locally and when I worked on some code it still had
them and I was sorta caught in a merge issue.  Will remove.


On Sat, Nov 9, 2013 at 8:24 PM, Sean Linsley <notifications@github.com>wrote:

> In spec/unit/asset_registration_spec.rb:
>
> > +      register_javascript "active_admin.js"
> > +      expect(javascripts).to eq ["active_admin.js"].to_set
> > +    end
> > +
> > +    it "should clear all existing javascripts" do
> > +      register_javascript "active_admin.js"
> > +      expect(javascripts).to eq ["active_admin.js"].to_set
> > +      clear_javascripts!
> > +      expect(javascripts).to be_empty
> > +    end
> > +
> > +    it "shouldn't register a javascript twice" do
> > +      register_javascript "active_admin.js"
> > +      register_javascript "active_admin.js"
> > +      expect(javascripts.length).to eq 1
> > +    end
>
> I can't imagine a future where this file will get any larger than it
> already is, so I don't think the added context blocks are necessary. I
> turned down your previous PR with these changes (#2607<https://github.com/gregbell/active_admin/pull/2607>),
> and my opinion hasn't changed since then. Would you mind removing these
> context blocks?
>
> —
> Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub<https://github.com/gregbell/active_admin/pull/2681/files#r7547372>
> .
>



-- 
Cheers, Michael.