On 05/04/2015 09:01 PM, Thomas De Schampheleire wrote:
Hi all,
So the official part of 'pytest adoption month' is over, so it's high
time to look back.
Yes, thanks a lot for the contributions. Just making it possible to run
the tests with pytest was a significant amount of work. Awesome!
pytest is now a fine alternative to nosetests ... but with some caveats:
* it is running a different number of tests - I am not entirely sure the
pytest coverage is a superset of nosetest
* we have some documentation of how to run tests with nosetests but no
documentation for pytest
* it seems like nosetests makes it more clear what is failing and makes
it easy to rerun specific tests after failing (even though it often
doesn't work) but it doesn't seem as easy with pytest ... but that might
be a documentation issue
* we haven't gotten much further than just being able to run the
existing tests with pytest - we haven't seen any significant benefits
from the new tooling yet
It might thus be possible to deprecate nosetest and switch to pytest but
it seems like it wouldn't make a significant difference. We could thus
keep supporting them both for now, with pytest as a very good
alternative to nosetests.
/Mads
_______________________________________________
kallithea-general mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.sfconservancy.org/mailman/listinfo/kallithea-general
