On 25-04-2024 15:15, Sandro wrote:
On 11-04-2024 13:54, Miro Hrončok wrote:
On 11. 04. 24 11:55, Sandro wrote:
While I ponder those thoughts some more, moving forward in either
direction, the next step would be writing a change proposal?
I'd start by:
Packaging pynose without hacks (only
On 11-04-2024 13:54, Miro Hrončok wrote:
On 11. 04. 24 11:55, Sandro wrote:
While I ponder those thoughts some more, moving forward in either
direction, the next step would be writing a change proposal?
I'd start by:
Packaging pynose without hacks (only making it Conflict with nose, no
On 11-04-2024 15:30, Sandro wrote:
I see "# Package doesn't provide any tests" in the %check section.
That certainly feels a bit dodgy. This successor of a test framework
decided to ditch all of the tests it used to have? That is certainly a
red flag.
More like a chicken and egg story,
On 11-04-2024 15:49, Ben Beasley wrote:
For a proposed nose successor, pynose doesn’t seem to have gained much
community traction so far: it has seven stars on GitHub[1] (compared to
770 for nose2, which itself was never that widely adopted and has fewer
than ten dependent packages in Fedora);
For a proposed nose successor, pynose doesn’t seem to have gained much
community traction so far: it has seven stars on GitHub[1] (compared to
770 for nose2, which itself was never that widely adopted and has fewer
than ten dependent packages in Fedora); and the imperfect but fairly
useful
On 11-04-2024 15:17, Miro Hrončok wrote:
On 11. 04. 24 15:05, Sandro wrote:
On 11-04-2024 13:54, Miro Hrončok wrote:
On 11. 04. 24 11:55, Sandro wrote:
While I ponder those thoughts some more, moving forward in either
direction, the next step would be writing a change proposal?
I'd start
On 11. 04. 24 15:05, Sandro wrote:
On 11-04-2024 13:54, Miro Hrončok wrote:
On 11. 04. 24 11:55, Sandro wrote:
While I ponder those thoughts some more, moving forward in either direction,
the next step would be writing a change proposal?
I'd start by:
Packaging pynose without hacks (only
On 11-04-2024 13:54, Miro Hrončok wrote:
On 11. 04. 24 11:55, Sandro wrote:
While I ponder those thoughts some more, moving forward in either
direction, the next step would be writing a change proposal?
I'd start by:
Packaging pynose without hacks (only making it Conflict with nose, no
On 11. 04. 24 11:55, Sandro wrote:
While I ponder those thoughts some more, moving forward in either direction,
the next step would be writing a change proposal?
I'd start by:
Packaging pynose without hacks (only making it Conflict with nose, no
compatibility Provides, Obsoletes or
On 10-04-2024 17:50, Miro Hrončok wrote:
On 10. 04. 24 17:30, Sandro wrote:
On 10-04-2024 12:04, Miro Hrončok wrote:
On 09. 04. 24 19:30, Sandro wrote:
Therefore, I'm thinking of introducing pynose as a drop in
replacement of deprecated nose. Pynose uses the same namespace as
nose, but
On 10. 04. 24 17:30, Sandro wrote:
On 10-04-2024 12:04, Miro Hrončok wrote:
On 09. 04. 24 19:30, Sandro wrote:
Therefore, I'm thinking of introducing pynose as a drop in replacement of
deprecated nose. Pynose uses the same namespace as nose, but provides
python3dist(pynose). Thus adding
On 10-04-2024 12:04, Miro Hrončok wrote:
On 09. 04. 24 19:30, Sandro wrote:
Therefore, I'm thinking of introducing pynose as a drop in replacement
of deprecated nose. Pynose uses the same namespace as nose, but
provides python3dist(pynose). Thus adding Provides: for nose would
make it a
On 10-04-2024 11:57, Lumír Balhar wrote:
This sounds like an interesting idea for one more reason. We are
currently working on the update of pytest to version 8 and that version
no longer runs nose setup/teardown functions/methods which, as far as we
know now, is a change that breaks a lot of
On 09. 04. 24 19:30, Sandro wrote:
Therefore, I'm thinking of introducing pynose as a drop in replacement of
deprecated nose. Pynose uses the same namespace as nose, but provides
python3dist(pynose). Thus adding Provides: for nose would make it a drop-in
replacement for packages currently
Hi.
This sounds like an interesting idea for one more reason. We are
currently working on the update of pytest to version 8 and that version
no longer runs nose setup/teardown functions/methods which, as far as we
know now, is a change that breaks a lot of packages we previously
migrated
Hi,
While looking into a package upgrade I came across pynose [1]. It
appears to be a drop-in replacement for nose [2], which has been
deprecated in Fedora 32 [3].
There are still quite a few packages depending on nose, that have not
yet moved away from it. The official successor to nose is
16 matches
Mail list logo
