[Rspec-devel] use case for: setup_once, teardown_once

[itsme213]

Bump.

> In this case I was actually using spec to specify some explicit 
> requirements about the (remote) results of a (remote) deployment, to say 
> things like:
>
> - the remote directory structure should satisfy ...
> - remote file time stamps should be ...
> - remote access controls should be ...
>
> How would mocks help with this? Or is this not an appropriate thing to 
> specify?

A bit more generally, if my tests are closer to integration or acceptance 
tests than unit tests (where my guess is one should test the actual 
assemblage without mocking of in-scope parts):

 - would it be appropriate to be testing expensive/slow things?
 - would it be reasonable to want to not repeat setup costs for each test?

Thanks.