Fully Agree ! I will do it then if no-one objects!

On Wed, Dec 18, 2019 at 5:39 PM Tomasz Urbaszek <tomasz.urbas...@polidea.com>
wrote:

> I agree that global implementation of asserts should happen after 2.0. But
> in the meantime it seems reasonable to decided on using asserts in the
> future and enforce that all new, not-conflicting tests should be written in
> pytest way, thus eliminating number of future changes.
>
> Also, after discussion with Kamil I think it would be good to describe the
> agreed approach in TESTING.md.
>
> T.
>
> On 2019/12/18 16:04:30, Jarek Potiuk <jarek.pot...@polidea.com> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > but I'm not
> > > sure which option is the best. Should we use pytest or unittest method?
> > >
> >
> > Yeah. This is the question that started the whole  thread. So far only
> > enthusiastic "yes" for the pythonic "asserts" as far as I can see.
> >
> > Anyone has some preference for the unittest ones ?
> >
> >
> > >
> > > On Wed, Dec 18, 2019 at 2:51 PM Kaxil Naik <kaxiln...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Yes I think I agree with that. We should now focus on new features
> and
> > > > improvements for the Users, now that we have done enough to improve
> it
> > > for
> > > > developers.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, Dec 18, 2019 at 1:34 PM Kamil Breguła <
> kamil.breg...@polidea.com
> > > >
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Hello,
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > "I'd like to hold off on something as large-scale as
> unittest2pytest
> > > > until
> > > > > 2.0 is out/until we no longer have to backport changes to the
> v1-10-*
> > > > > branches." ~Ash Berlin-Taylor
> > > > >
> > > > > I would also prefer to focus on working on new features for
> Airflow 2.0
> > > > > instead of improving the developer environment. We already have a
> lot
> > > of
> > > > > changes in the environment, and the code is more solid.  Users also
> > > > expect
> > > > > new features so that we don't lag in comparison to other products,
> e.g.
> > > > > Conductor, Prefetch, Dagster.
> > > > >
> > > > > Best regards,
> > > > > Kamil
> > > > >
> > > > > On Thu, Dec 12, 2019 at 7:58 PM Daniel Huang <dxhu...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Big yes to asserts in pytest!
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Tue, Dec 10, 2019 at 12:50 AM Michał Słowikowski <
> > > > > > michal.slowikow...@polidea.com> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > I like this idea, and such assertion looks very promising.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > assert "maximum recursion" in str(excinfo.value)
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Have a nice day!
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Mon, Dec 9, 2019 at 6:16 PM Tomasz Urbaszek <
> > > > > > > tomasz.urbas...@polidea.com>
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > It's definitely worth a try! I even mentioned this in AIP-27.
> > > But I
> > > > > > think
> > > > > > > > this script does not change SetUp / TearDown to an
> appropriate
> > > > > > fixture.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > T.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Mon, Dec 9, 2019 at 6:03 PM Jarek Potiuk <
> > > > > jarek.pot...@polidea.com>
> > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Well. I think (as discussed with Kamil) maybe even convert
> the
> > > > > tests
> > > > > > > > > automatically.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > How about we try:
> > > https://github.com/pytest-dev/unittest2pytest
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > J.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > On Mon, Dec 9, 2019 at 5:48 PM Tomasz Urbaszek <
> > > > > > > > > tomasz.urbas...@polidea.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >> I agree. Should we encourage people to use asserts when
> adding
> > > > new
> > > > > > > > tests?
> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > >> T.
> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > >> On Mon, Dec 9, 2019 at 4:35 PM Kaxil Naik <
> > > kaxiln...@gmail.com>
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > >>> Yup, we should.
> > > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > > > >>> On Mon, Dec 9, 2019 at 3:20 PM Ash Berlin-Taylor <
> > > > a...@apache.org
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > > > >>> > Absolutely, and I don't think any of the concers about
> it
> > > in
> > > > > > > run-time
> > > > > > > > >>> code
> > > > > > > > >>> > apply! Plus it is the way pytest recommends, and I
> think we
> > > > get
> > > > > > > nicer
> > > > > > > > >>> > failure messages using assert-style too?
> > > > > > > > >>> >
> > > > > > > > >>> > -a
> > > > > > > > >>> >
> > > > > > > > >>> > On 9 December 2019 15:06:07 GMT, Jarek Potiuk <
> > > > > > > > >>> jarek.pot...@polidea.com>
> > > > > > > > >>> > wrote:
> > > > > > > > >>> > >Hello everyone.
> > > > > > > > >>> > >
> > > > > > > > >>> > >So asserts are now banned from our main code. However
> with
> > > > the
> > > > > > > > recent
> > > > > > > > >>> > >introduction of pytest we now have a chance to switch
> to
> > > > using
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > >>> > >standard
> > > > > > > > >>> > >asserts instead of deriving from TestCase class and
> using
> > > > > > > > >>> > >assertSomething()
> > > > > > > > >>> > >methods.
> > > > > > > > >>> > >
> > > > > > > > >>> > >I find it much more readable and nice and pytest is
> great
> > > in
> > > > > > > > reporting
> > > > > > > > >>> > >the
> > > > > > > > >>> > >errors in a clear and readable way. And all the cases
> > > where
> > > > > > > asserts
> > > > > > > > >>> are
> > > > > > > > >>> > >optimized away are not valid in this case.
> > > > > > > > >>> > >
> > > > > > > > >>> > >I think we should gradually switch to using asserts
> in our
> > > > > > tests.
> > > > > > > > >>> > >
> > > > > > > > >>> > >WDYT?
> > > > > > > > >>> > >
> > > > > > > > >>> > >More info:
> > > > > > > > >>> > >
> > > > > > > > >>> > >Doc about asserts in pytest:
> > > > > > > > >>> > >http://doc.pytest.org/en/latest/assert.html
> > > > > > > > >>> > >
> > > > > > > > >>> > >Demo of common assertion errors produced with pytest:
> > > > > > > > >>> > >
> > > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> http://doc.pytest.org/en/latest/example/reportingdemo.html#tbreportdemo
> > > > > > > > >>> > >
> > > > > > > > >>> > >J.
> > > > > > > > >>> > >
> > > > > > > > >>> > >--
> > > > > > > > >>> > >
> > > > > > > > >>> > >Jarek Potiuk
> > > > > > > > >>> > >Polidea <https://www.polidea.com/> | Principal
> Software
> > > > > > Engineer
> > > > > > > > >>> > >
> > > > > > > > >>> > >M: +48 660 796 129 <+48660796129>
> > > > > > > > >>> > >[image: Polidea] <https://www.polidea.com/>
> > > > > > > > >>> >
> > > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > >> --
> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > >> Tomasz Urbaszek
> > > > > > > > >> Polidea <https://www.polidea.com/> | Junior Software
> Engineer
> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > >> M: +48 505 628 493 <+48505628493>
> > > > > > > > >> E: tomasz.urbas...@polidea.com <
> tomasz.urbasz...@polidea.com>
> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > >> Unique Tech
> > > > > > > > >> Check out our projects! <https://www.polidea.com/our-work
> >
> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Jarek Potiuk
> > > > > > > > > Polidea <https://www.polidea.com/> | Principal Software
> > > Engineer
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > M: +48 660 796 129 <+48660796129>
> > > > > > > > > [image: Polidea] <https://www.polidea.com/>
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Tomasz Urbaszek
> > > > > > > > Polidea <https://www.polidea.com/> | Junior Software
> Engineer
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > M: +48 505 628 493 <+48505628493>
> > > > > > > > E: tomasz.urbas...@polidea.com <tomasz.urbasz...@polidea.com
> >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Unique Tech
> > > > > > > > Check out our projects! <https://www.polidea.com/our-work>
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > --
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Michał Słowikowski
> > > > > > > Polidea <https://www.polidea.com/> | Test Engineer
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > E: michal.slowikow...@polidea.com
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Unique Tech
> > > > > > > Check out our projects! <https://www.polidea.com/our-work>
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> >
> > Jarek Potiuk
> > Polidea <https://www.polidea.com/> | Principal Software Engineer
> >
> > M: +48 660 796 129 <+48660796129>
> > [image: Polidea] <https://www.polidea.com/>
> >
>


-- 

Jarek Potiuk
Polidea <https://www.polidea.com/> | Principal Software Engineer

M: +48 660 796 129 <+48660796129>
[image: Polidea] <https://www.polidea.com/>

Reply via email to