I just think that the test pack for testing brokers isn't related to the "python-ness" of the python tests... In fact they are designed for testing *any* AMQP implementation. This is fundamentally different to the concept of unit testing the Qpid Python Library...
Looking at it the other way, for your unit tests, you shouldn't be needing to run a broker :-) -- Rob On 31/05/07, Rafael Schloming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
This is my fault, I accidentally checked in the codec tests before applying the fixes. I've disabled them for the moment. I did create some more partitioning by adding them in the "tests" directory rather than the "tests_0-8" or "tests_0-9" directories. I modified the test-runner to run "tests" regardless of the version in use. This isn't quite the same as the internal/protocol distinction since there are probably useful protocol tests that are not version specific. It would be easy enough to add something like an "internal" directory to make it clear which failures are protocol related and which aren't. I'd prefer still running all tests by default as the internal tests are quite fast and should normally be a good sanity check as to whether protocol failures indicate a broker issue or a python client issue. --Rafael Robert Godfrey wrote: > +1 > > I think there definitely needs to be a distinction between tests which > happen to be written in Python, which are testing the broker; and > tests which are testing the Python code. > > -- Rob > > > > On 31/05/07, Gordon Sim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Some excellent new unit tests have been added to the python code on >> trunk. Not all of these pass at present. >> >> Brokers using the python run-tests script to test themselves will pick >> these new tests up and will report failures. One option is to add the >> failures to the list of expected failures for each broker. >> >> However as these new tests don't even open a connection to a broker, I >> wondered whether it would be more sensible to start partitioning the >> tests into unit tests for the python code itself and tests used to >> verify broker behaviour. That then seemed worth raising as a question >> for the group... thoughts? >> >> >>
