Be more explicit about choosing test projects

With the incoming introduction of more test projects, I believe
it's better to explicitly step into them rather than relying
on the cucumber annotations to get into one project or the
other.

Yes it's more code, but less magic and more explicitness.

Drive by renamed the parallel tests project, no need to extra
call out that it's a project.

Author: PragTob

features/branch_coverage.feature

@@ -3,6 +3,9 @@ Feature:
 
   Simply executing branch coverage gives ok results.
 
+  Background:
+    Given I'm working on the project "faked_project"
+
   Scenario:
     Given SimpleCov for RSpec is configured with:
       """

features/config_autoload.feature

@@ -11,6 +11,9 @@ Feature:
   and then use the same configuration on all test suites simply
   by doing a 'require "simplecov"'
 
+  Background:
+    Given I'm working on the project "faked_project"
+
   Scenario:
     Given a file named ".simplecov" with:
       """

features/config_command_name.feature

@@ -6,6 +6,9 @@ Feature: Custom names for individual test suites
   Test/Unit, RSpec and Cucumber, but if that is insufficient, each test suite
   config can be given a custom command name using SimpleCov.command_name.
 
+  Background:
+    Given I'm working on the project "faked_project"
+
   Scenario:
     Given SimpleCov for Test/Unit is configured with:
       """

features/config_coverage_dir.feature

@@ -6,6 +6,9 @@ Feature:
   will be put there instead of the default 'coverage' directory
   in your project's root.
 
+  Background:
+    Given I'm working on the project "faked_project"
+
   Scenario:
     Given SimpleCov for Test/Unit is configured with:
       """

features/config_deactivate_merging.feature

@@ -8,6 +8,9 @@ Feature:
   It's probably preferrable to generate the individual suite results into separate
   output directories instead (see SimpleCov.coverage_dir), but it is possible :)
 
+  Background:
+    Given I'm working on the project "faked_project"
+
   Scenario:
     Given SimpleCov for Test/Unit is configured with:
       """
@@ -39,4 +42,3 @@ Feature:
     Given I open the coverage report
     Then the report should be based upon:
       | RSpec |
-

features/config_formatters.feature

@@ -10,6 +10,9 @@ Feature:
     SimpleCov::Formatter::MultiFormatter is a formatter
     used to call multiple formatters at once.
 
+  Background:
+    Given I'm working on the project "faked_project"
+
   Scenario: With SimpleFormatter
     Given SimpleCov for Test/Unit is configured with:
       """

features/config_merge_timeout.feature

@@ -12,6 +12,9 @@ Feature:
   are out of date when the second suite finishes and thus does not end up
   in the report.
 
+  Background:
+    Given I'm working on the project "faked_project"
+
   Scenario:
     Given SimpleCov for Test/Unit is configured with:
       """
@@ -36,4 +39,3 @@ Feature:
     And I open the coverage report generated with `bundle exec rspec spec`
     Then the report should be based upon:
       | RSpec |
-

features/config_nocov_token.feature

@@ -4,6 +4,9 @@ Feature:
   Code wrapped in # :nocov: will be ignored by coverage reports.
   The name of the token can be configured with SimpleCov.nocov_token or SimpleCov.skip_token
 
+  Background:
+    Given I'm working on the project "faked_project"
+
   Scenario: Custom nocov token using nocov_token
     Given SimpleCov for Test/Unit is configured with:
       """

features/config_profiles.feature

@@ -6,7 +6,8 @@ Feature:
   that can be loaded at once.
 
   Background:
-    Given SimpleCov for Test/Unit is configured with:
+    Given I'm working on the project "faked_project"
+    And SimpleCov for Test/Unit is configured with:
       """
       require 'simplecov'
       """

features/config_project_name.feature

@@ -5,6 +5,8 @@ Feature:
   If this is not sufficient for you, you can specify a custom name using
   SimpleCov.project_name('xyz')
 
+  Background:
+    Given I'm working on the project "faked_project"
 
   Scenario: Guessed name
     Given SimpleCov for Test/Unit is configured with:

features/config_styles.feature

@@ -6,6 +6,7 @@ Feature:
   preference or project requirements.
 
   Background:
+    Given I'm working on the project "faked_project"
     Given SimpleCov for Test/Unit is configured with:
       """
       require 'simplecov'
@@ -118,4 +119,3 @@ Feature:
     When I open the coverage report generated with `bundle exec rake test`
     Then I should see "4 files in total."
     And I should see "using Config Test Runner" within "#footer"
-

features/config_tracked_files.feature

@@ -4,6 +4,9 @@ Feature:
   Using the setting `tracked_files` should add files that were not
   required to the report.
 
+  Background:
+    Given I'm working on the project "faked_project"
+
   Scenario:
     Given SimpleCov for Test/Unit is configured with:
       """

features/config_tracked_files_relevant_lines.feature

@@ -4,6 +4,9 @@ Feature:
   Using the setting `tracked_files` should classify whether lines
   are relevant or not (such as whitespace or comments).
 
+  Background:
+    Given I'm working on the project "faked_project"
+
   Scenario:
     Given SimpleCov for RSpec is configured with:
       """

features/cucumber_basic.feature

@@ -4,6 +4,9 @@ Feature:
   Simply adding the basic simplecov lines to a project should get
   the user a coverage report after running `cucumber features`
 
+  Background:
+    Given I'm working on the project "faked_project"
+
   Scenario:
     Given SimpleCov for Cucumber is configured with:
       """

features/maximum_coverage_drop.feature

@@ -4,6 +4,9 @@ Feature:
   Exit code should be non-zero if the overall coverage decreases by more than
   the maximum_coverage_drop threshold.
 
+  Background:
+    Given I'm working on the project "faked_project"
+
   Scenario: maximum_coverage_drop configured cam cause spec failure
     Given SimpleCov for Test/Unit is configured with:
       """
@@ -136,4 +139,3 @@ Feature:
         }
       }
       """
-

features/merging_test_unit_and_rspec.feature

@@ -5,6 +5,9 @@ Feature:
   when both have been run recently. The coverage report will feature
   the joined results of all test suites that are using SimpleCov.
 
+  Background:
+    Given I'm working on the project "faked_project"
+
   Scenario:
     Given SimpleCov for Test/Unit is configured with:
       """

features/minimum_coverage.feature

@@ -4,6 +4,9 @@ Feature:
   Exit code should be non-zero if the overall coverage is below the
   minimum_coverage threshold.
 
+  Background:
+    Given I'm working on the project "faked_project"
+
   Scenario:
     Given SimpleCov for Test/Unit is configured with:
       """

features/old_version_json.feature

@@ -1,11 +1,14 @@
-@rspec @old_coverage_json
+@rspec
 
 Feature:
 
   This test project has a resultset.json generated by simplecov 0.17.1 lying around
   (we changed the file format in 0.18) - as long as we want a hassle free upgrade
   path from 0.17 and below to our current version this cuke should pass :) #820
 
+  Background:
+    Given I'm working on the project "old_coverage_json"
+
   Scenario: Running the tests succeeds
     Given the paths in the old .resultset.json are adjusted to the current environment
     When I open the coverage report generated with `bundle exec rspec spec`

features/parallel_tests.feature

@@ -1,11 +1,13 @@
-@parallel_tests_project @rspec
-@disable-bundler
+@rspec @disable-bundler
 
 Feature:
 
   Parallel tests and its corresponding test project work together with Simplecov
   just fine and they produce the same output like a normal rspec run.
 
+  Background:
+    Given I'm working on the project "parallel_tests"
+
   # see #815
   @wip
   Scenario: Running it through parallel_tests produces the same results as a normal rspec run

features/refuse_coverage_drop.feature

@@ -4,6 +4,9 @@ Feature:
   Exit code should be non-zero if the overall coverage decreases.
   And last_run file should not be overwritten with new coverage value.
 
+  Background:
+    Given I'm working on the project "faked_project"
+
   Scenario: refuse_coverage_drop configured
     Given SimpleCov for Test/Unit is configured with:
       """

features/rspec_basic.feature

@@ -4,6 +4,9 @@ Feature:
   Simply adding the basic simplecov lines to a project should get
   the user a coverage report after running `rspec`
 
+  Background:
+    Given I'm working on the project "faked_project"
+
   Scenario:
     Given SimpleCov for RSpec is configured with:
       """

features/rspec_fails_on_initialization.feature

@@ -3,6 +3,9 @@ Feature:
 
   Running specs with a failing rspec setup
 
+  Background:
+    Given I'm working on the project "faked_project"
+
   Scenario: Fail if rspec fails before starting its tests
     Given a file named "spec/spec_helper.rb" with:
       """

features/rspec_groups_and_filters_basic.feature

@@ -4,6 +4,9 @@ Feature:
   Defining some groups and filters should give a corresponding
   coverage report that respects those settings after running rspec
 
+  Background:
+    Given I'm working on the project "faked_project"
+
   Scenario:
     Given SimpleCov for RSpec is configured with:
       """

features/rspec_groups_and_filters_complex.feature

@@ -6,6 +6,9 @@ Feature: Sophisticated grouping and filtering on RSpec
   and potentially weird conditions to remove files from the report or add them
   to specific groups.
 
+  Background:
+    Given I'm working on the project "faked_project"
+
   Scenario:
     Given SimpleCov for RSpec is configured with:
       """

features/rspec_groups_using_filter_class.feature

@@ -6,6 +6,9 @@ Feature: Grouping on RSpec using a custom filter class
   must implement the matches? method, which is used to determine whether
   or not a file should be added to the group.
 
+  Background:
+    Given I'm working on the project "faked_project"
+
   Scenario:
     Given SimpleCov for RSpec is configured with:
       """

features/rspec_without_simplecov.feature

@@ -3,6 +3,9 @@ Feature:
 
   Running specs without simplecov configuration
 
+  Background:
+    Given I'm working on the project "faked_project"
+
   Scenario: No config at all
     When I successfully run `bundle exec rspec spec`
     Then no coverage report should have been generated

features/skipping_code_blocks_manually.feature

@@ -5,6 +5,7 @@ Feature:
   against the coverage numbers.
 
   Background:
+    Given I'm working on the project "faked_project"
     Given SimpleCov for Test/Unit is configured with:
       """
       require 'simplecov'

features/step_definitions/simplecov_steps.rb

@@ -85,3 +85,15 @@
   binding.pry
   # rubocop:enable Lint/Debugger
 end
+
+Given "I'm working on the project {string}" do |project_name|
+  this_dir = File.dirname(__FILE__)
+
+  # Clean up and create blank state for project
+  cd(".") do
+    FileUtils.rm_rf "project"
+    FileUtils.cp_r File.join(this_dir, "../../test_projects/#{project_name}/"), "project"
+  end
+
+  step 'I cd to "project"'
+end

features/support/env.rb

@@ -46,28 +46,6 @@
   skip_this_scenario unless SimpleCov.branch_coverage_supported?
 end
 
-Before("@parallel_tests_project") do
-  @test_project_name = "parallel_tests_project"
-end
-
-Before("@old_coverage_json") do
-  @test_project_name = "old_coverage_json"
-end
-
-Before do
-  this_dir = File.dirname(__FILE__)
-
-  @test_project_name ||= "faked_project"
-
-  # Clean up and create blank state for fake project
-  cd(".") do
-    FileUtils.rm_rf "project"
-    FileUtils.cp_r File.join(this_dir, "../../test_projects/#{@test_project_name}/"), "project"
-  end
-
-  step 'I cd to "project"'
-end
-
 Aruba.configure do |config|
   config.allow_absolute_paths = true
 

features/test_unit_basic.feature

@@ -4,6 +4,9 @@ Feature:
   Simply adding the basic simplecov lines to a project should get
   the user a coverage report after running `rake test`
 
+  Background:
+    Given I'm working on the project "faked_project"
+
   Scenario:
     Given SimpleCov for Test/Unit is configured with:
       """

features/test_unit_collate.feature

@@ -3,6 +3,9 @@ Feature:
 
   Using SimpleCov.collate should get the user a coverage report
 
+  Background:
+    Given I'm working on the project "faked_project"
+
   Scenario:
     Given SimpleCov for Test/Unit is configured with:
       """

features/test_unit_groups_and_filters_basic.feature

@@ -4,6 +4,9 @@ Feature:
   Defining some groups and filters should give a corresponding
   coverage report that respects those settings after running tests
 
+  Background:
+    Given I'm working on the project "faked_project"
+
   Scenario:
     Given SimpleCov for Test/Unit is configured with:
       """

features/test_unit_groups_and_filters_complex.feature

@@ -6,6 +6,9 @@ Feature: Sophisticated grouping and filtering on Test/Unit
   and potentially weird conditions to remove files from the report or add them
   to specific groups.
 
+  Background:
+    Given I'm working on the project "faked_project"
+
   Scenario:
     Given SimpleCov for Test/Unit is configured with:
       """

features/test_unit_groups_using_filter_class.feature

@@ -6,6 +6,9 @@ Feature: Grouping on Test/Unit using a custom filter class
   must implement the matches? method, which is used to determine whether
   or not a file should be added to the group.
 
+  Background:
+    Given I'm working on the project "faked_project"
+
   Scenario:
     Given SimpleCov for Test/Unit is configured with:
       """