#33422: Document @isolate_apps
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Reporter: Adam Johnson | Owner: nobody
Type: | Status: new
Cleanup/optimization |
Component: Testing framework | Version: dev
Severity: Normal | Resolution:
Keywords: | Triage Stage:
| Unreviewed
Has patch: 0 | Needs documentation: 0
Needs tests: 0 | Patch needs improvement: 0
Easy pickings: 0 | UI/UX: 0
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Comment (by Adam Johnson):
If there are too many concerns, we could document it similarly to
`available_apps`
(https://docs.djangoproject.com/en/stable/topics/testing/advanced/#django.test.TransactionTestCase.available_apps)
with a note that it is still regarded as private and liable to change. I
think noting some caveats is fine.
Is there a good way to create an isolated model class for a test without
`isolated_apps`? It seems like a common enough problem when making custom
model classes, fields, or similar.
--
Ticket URL: <https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/33422#comment:2>
Django <https://code.djangoproject.com/>
The Web framework for perfectionists with deadlines.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Django updates" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-updates/068.c40ae48f9190fb6801ca2571924afebe%40djangoproject.com.
