On 06/18/2013 04:59 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote: > The issue here is not really the burden of maintaining an alternate > testing method in the tree... it's that by default newcomers use the > alternate method rather than the one used by our CI infrastructure, > which should be their default choice. > > Personally I would introduce a TESTING file that would describe all > available methods for running tests, and rename/move run_tests.sh to > something less discoverable... so that people looking for ways to run > tests would find TESTING first.
+1 As a developer newly assigned to keystone work I will echo the value of both the run_tests.sh script because of it's obvious presence and utility. A TESTING file should be mandatory as well. I immediately found the run_tests.sh script but fumbled around for a while until I found all the information I needed to run the tests (despite already being familiar with nose). It also took me a while to figure out how to run an individual test (mostly because I assumed one had to include the tests directory in either a test pathname or module path) but run_tests.sh apparently points nose into the test directory. Had there been a TESTING readme file it would have definitely saved me time and frustration. I had to learn about tox after a suggestion in IRC. Coming from a distro perspective I prefer not to see non-distro items being installed (venv has worked well though). And I definitely like being able to drop into the debugger, nose has served me well in the past and I like it. John _______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
