On Sun, 2010-12-19 at 13:57 -0800, Dave Borowitz wrote: > AFAIK nose is still canonical, since it's what's in the Makefile. I'm > fine with this provided: > -if no git is installed, tests are still skipped rather than failed > -you rewrite the 'check' make target such that it doesn't run the > non-compat tests twice. FWIW this is how trunk behaves at the moment.
> A nice-to-have would be a 'check-nocompat' or similar make target. I > for one do things like run the tests on a bunch of sequential patches, > and it's nice when those take 1s each rather than 10s. Adding a check-nocompat target seems reasonable to me. I use testr for most of my projects, it can e.g. parallelize test runs and re-run only the failing tests from the previous run. % time testr run --parallel ... id=59, tests=423, skips=6 testr run --parallel 0.64s user 0.22s system 18% cpu 4.776 total Cheers, Jelmer > On Sun, Dec 19, 2010 at 13:36, Augie Fackler <[email protected]> > wrote: > > https://github.com/jelmer/dulwich/commit/b5490da68052e33b904e32c04f2aef140c8bcb45 > > This means that nose will no longer skip these tests by > default, which we had historically (as I understood things, > anyway) wanted. Is nose no longer the canonical way of running > tests? I thought we didn't want to support test runners > without discovery support? (I thought unittest2 supported > discovery...) > > Thanks, > Augie > > > _______________________________________________ > Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~dulwich-users > Post to : [email protected] > Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~dulwich-users > More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp > >
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~dulwich-users Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~dulwich-users More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
