Neal Norwitz schrieb: > On Tue, Feb 26, 2008 at 11:47 PM, Brett Cannon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> Well, in my opinion "batteries included" is great, but not when one of >> the batteries consistently acts up and requires a good shake to get >> working again. The bsddb module has consistent reliability issues when >> it comes to testing (and I suspect it has more to do with Sleepycat >> than the bindings). I know I am tired of getting buildbot errors >> saying that the bsddb tests died more consistently than most tests >> over their history. > > I agree that bsddb has been a pain. It's about 1 of 10 tests that > fill that category. I've been working on reducing these problems > (recently: test_bsddb3, test_smptlib, test_xmlrpclib, and I'm sure > there are others I forgot). Rather than remove modules, it would be > more productive if we fixed the flaky tests. Then we wouldn't have to > ignore failures, we could trust the buildbots.
Maybe the flaky tests could be moved towards the end? This way we could at least see if the other tests work. Thomas _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
