Yes I agree. The way I test the GitHub API now is by running a local server which returns my JSON representation..

I looked at other API bindings to GitHub written in ruby to find an approach for testing[1].
A nice feature I saw there was recording requests in a "Cassette".
This way you run your requests once "live", and afterwards everything can be done offline

1: https://github.com/peter-murach/github#7-testing

2016-03-03 9:01 GMT+01:00 Yuriy Tymchuk <yuriy.tymchuk@me.com>:
Look guys,

I know that you can start a super smart discussion about the approaches to test network-related stuff.

But my question was super simple. If I���m writing something that accesses github I can write a test for handling request limit error. And in ruby I can say: ���ok in this test when you get a request to https://github������������/SomePathThatITest hive a response with this number and this headers���. And then I can test the result. If I cannot do this in Pharo, then I will not test it, it���s that easy.

Cheers.
Uko

> On 03 Mar 2016, at 03:53, Chris Muller <ma.chris.m@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I use a framework designed for testing network programs.�� Depending on
> the test, it launches 3-5 "player" copies of the image solely for
> participation in the tests.�� The controlling image runs the unit
> tests, which each send their dance of rpc messages to the players to
> make them run the tests in a controlled fashion.
>
> The failure tests involve setting a boolean flag in the server image
> that causes it to execute "Smalltalk quitPrimitive" from a place deep
> in the system -- i.e., at one place in mid disk-write, to exercise the
> recovery code.
>
> This approach to testing network programs is heavier-weight than a
> mock and doesn't integrate well with the SUnit browser.�� But it does
> provide me a comfortable context that assures me it really does work
> over the network.�� Back then, I was wanting to learn and practice my
> TCP socket programming anyway, so it was hard for me to allocate time
> to learning a mock which.. at the end of the day, I knew, would nag me
> to wonder whether my program would really work over the network for
> real.
>
>
> On Wed, Mar 2, 2016 at 6:16 PM, Frank Shearar <frank.shearar@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Er. How do you reliably inject arbitrary network faults in your
>> localhost network again?
>>
>> frank
>>
>> On 2 March 2016 at 08:27, Chris Muller <asqueaker@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> A mock network will never test as thoroughly as locahost network..
>>>
>>> On Wed, Mar 2, 2016 at 6:32 AM, Yuriy Tymchuk <yuriy.tymchuk@me.com> wrote:
>>>> HI, there is one thing in Ruby (on Rails) that I really like and it is a option to mock network. This means that when you run a test your network requests are handled by a mock object and you can tell it that for this URI it should give you this response. This is helpful if you don���t want to rely on a network availability or test certain corner cases.
>>>>
>>>> Is there anything like this in Pharo?
>>>>
>>>> Uko
>>>
>