Re: [gdal-dev] Motion: adopt RFC 72: Run tests with pytest
(Just saw Jonathan's email) That approach to `ids` makes sense to me. Let's try and get the current PR merged and I'll submit that as a followup PR (I have a few other minor changes I want to make too, but have been holding off since the current one is too enormous as-is) On Tue, 11 Dec 2018 at 13:07 Craig de Stigter < craig.destig...@koordinates.com> wrote: > Thanks for the votes and kind words :) > > I'd applied Kurt's super-minor wording suggestions but haven't added any > new sections (on fiona, extra examples, etc) yet. I'll try and incorporate > those changes in the next couple days. > > Cheers > Craig > > On Tue, 11 Dec 2018 at 11:07 Kurt Schwehr wrote: > >> To follow on to Howard's comment about testing in python... >> >> I'm looking forward to the day that GDAL can drop all python 2.x support >> and testing! >> >> And anyone working on C++ testing is welcome to the code here. I'll >> happily donate it with a license change to GDAL (it's apache 2.0 right >> now). You are free refactor however. Or just use any bits that you think >> are helpful if going to a different testing library. I can also donate >> some of the 80+k files in my fuzzer corpus as test inputs that cover weird >> corners of the code. >> >> https://github.com/schwehr/gdal-autotest2/tree/master/cpp >> >> On Mon, Dec 10, 2018 at 11:39 AM Howard Butler wrote: >> >>> +1 >>> >>> I watched the ticket traffic and shuddered :) Thank you. GDAL's testing >>> probably predates five or six Python testing regimes/eras. I also have >>> the concern about GDAL's testing going through Python, but this RFC will >>> make it much easier for people to contribute and improve the story. >>> >>> >>> Congratulations on a huge lift! >>> >>> >>> Howard >>> >>> >>> On 12/9/18 9:48 PM, Kurt Schwehr wrote: >>> > I haven't had a chance to read the RFC yet, so I can't yet vote. >>> However, >>> > a huge thank you to Craig and everyone else who put in effort to make >>> this >>> > happen! >>> > >>> > On Sun, Dec 9, 2018 at 7:05 PM Craig de Stigter < >>> > craig.destig...@koordinates.com> wrote: >>> > >>> >> Jonathan >>> >> >>> >>> it's worth spending a little thought on coming up with a scheme for >>> >> test-ids. >>> >> >>> >> I've been through the list of parametrized tests and tweaked the `ids` >>> >> kwargs to make them a little more helpful at first glance: >>> >> >>> https://github.com/OSGeo/gdal/pull/963/commits/8db599e7bc08b7dc73d81591898ed0f5f4243a58 >>> >> >>> >> I didn't see any way to use `pytest_make_parametrize_id` really; IDs >>> >> rightly vary enough between tests that I can't see that hook being >>> very >>> >> useful here. >>> >> >>> >> Cheers >>> >> Craig de Stigter >>> >> >>> >> On Mon, 10 Dec 2018 at 09:59 jratike80 < >>> >> jukka.rahko...@maanmittauslaitos.fi> wrote: >>> >> >>> >>> +0 >>> >>> >>> >>> -Jukka Rahkonen- >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> Even Rouault-2 wrote >>> PSC members, >>> >>> gentle reminder to cast your vote on this. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> >>> Even >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> >>> Sent from: >>> http://osgeo-org.1560.x6.nabble.com/GDAL-Dev-f3742093.html >>> >>> ___ >>> >>> gdal-dev mailing list >>> >>> gdal-dev@lists.osgeo.org >>> >>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/gdal-dev >>> >> ___ >>> >> gdal-dev mailing list >>> >> gdal-dev@lists.osgeo.org >>> >> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/gdal-dev >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > ___ >>> > gdal-dev mailing list >>> > gdal-dev@lists.osgeo.org >>> > https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/gdal-dev >>> >>> ___ >>> gdal-dev mailing list >>> gdal-dev@lists.osgeo.org >>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/gdal-dev >> >> >> >> -- >> -- >> http://schwehr.org >> ___ >> gdal-dev mailing list >> gdal-dev@lists.osgeo.org >> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/gdal-dev > > ___ gdal-dev mailing list gdal-dev@lists.osgeo.org https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/gdal-dev
Re: [gdal-dev] Motion: adopt RFC 72: Run tests with pytest
Thanks for the votes and kind words :) I'd applied Kurt's super-minor wording suggestions but haven't added any new sections (on fiona, extra examples, etc) yet. I'll try and incorporate those changes in the next couple days. Cheers Craig On Tue, 11 Dec 2018 at 11:07 Kurt Schwehr wrote: > To follow on to Howard's comment about testing in python... > > I'm looking forward to the day that GDAL can drop all python 2.x support > and testing! > > And anyone working on C++ testing is welcome to the code here. I'll > happily donate it with a license change to GDAL (it's apache 2.0 right > now). You are free refactor however. Or just use any bits that you think > are helpful if going to a different testing library. I can also donate > some of the 80+k files in my fuzzer corpus as test inputs that cover weird > corners of the code. > > https://github.com/schwehr/gdal-autotest2/tree/master/cpp > > On Mon, Dec 10, 2018 at 11:39 AM Howard Butler wrote: > >> +1 >> >> I watched the ticket traffic and shuddered :) Thank you. GDAL's testing >> probably predates five or six Python testing regimes/eras. I also have >> the concern about GDAL's testing going through Python, but this RFC will >> make it much easier for people to contribute and improve the story. >> >> >> Congratulations on a huge lift! >> >> >> Howard >> >> >> On 12/9/18 9:48 PM, Kurt Schwehr wrote: >> > I haven't had a chance to read the RFC yet, so I can't yet vote. >> However, >> > a huge thank you to Craig and everyone else who put in effort to make >> this >> > happen! >> > >> > On Sun, Dec 9, 2018 at 7:05 PM Craig de Stigter < >> > craig.destig...@koordinates.com> wrote: >> > >> >> Jonathan >> >> >> >>> it's worth spending a little thought on coming up with a scheme for >> >> test-ids. >> >> >> >> I've been through the list of parametrized tests and tweaked the `ids` >> >> kwargs to make them a little more helpful at first glance: >> >> >> https://github.com/OSGeo/gdal/pull/963/commits/8db599e7bc08b7dc73d81591898ed0f5f4243a58 >> >> >> >> I didn't see any way to use `pytest_make_parametrize_id` really; IDs >> >> rightly vary enough between tests that I can't see that hook being very >> >> useful here. >> >> >> >> Cheers >> >> Craig de Stigter >> >> >> >> On Mon, 10 Dec 2018 at 09:59 jratike80 < >> >> jukka.rahko...@maanmittauslaitos.fi> wrote: >> >> >> >>> +0 >> >>> >> >>> -Jukka Rahkonen- >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> Even Rouault-2 wrote >> PSC members, >> >> gentle reminder to cast your vote on this. >> >> Thanks, >> >> Even >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> -- >> >>> Sent from: http://osgeo-org.1560.x6.nabble.com/GDAL-Dev-f3742093.html >> >>> ___ >> >>> gdal-dev mailing list >> >>> gdal-dev@lists.osgeo.org >> >>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/gdal-dev >> >> ___ >> >> gdal-dev mailing list >> >> gdal-dev@lists.osgeo.org >> >> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/gdal-dev >> > >> > >> > >> > ___ >> > gdal-dev mailing list >> > gdal-dev@lists.osgeo.org >> > https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/gdal-dev >> >> ___ >> gdal-dev mailing list >> gdal-dev@lists.osgeo.org >> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/gdal-dev > > > > -- > -- > http://schwehr.org > ___ > gdal-dev mailing list > gdal-dev@lists.osgeo.org > https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/gdal-dev ___ gdal-dev mailing list gdal-dev@lists.osgeo.org https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/gdal-dev
Re: [gdal-dev] Motion: adopt RFC 72: Run tests with pytest
On jeudi 6 décembre 2018 11:40:49 CET Craig de Stigter wrote: > Hi > > I appreciate your comments on the pytest proposal and all the support to > help get it this far. Given no actionable improvements have been suggested, > and the feedback thus far seems encouraging... > > I move to adopt RFC 72: Run tests with pytest. > > https://trac.osgeo.org/gdal/wiki/rfc72_pytest I declare this motion passed with the following votes from PSC members: +1 from EvenR, DanielM, HowardB and KurtS +0 from JukkaR Even -- Spatialys - Geospatial professional services http://www.spatialys.com ___ gdal-dev mailing list gdal-dev@lists.osgeo.org https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/gdal-dev
Re: [gdal-dev] Motion: adopt RFC 72: Run tests with pytest
+1 Kurt Awesome!! It's great to see that my work in https://github.com/schwehr/gdal-autotest2/tree/master/python is obsolete. Some very minor suggestions: - "Support testing under Python 2 & Python 3 (2.7+)" Move the (2.7+) to be with Python 2. - Mention that Fiona and Rasterio also use pytest - Add the word "existing" so it's obvious right off that the first example is not new. "A typical GDAL python unit test:" -> "A typical existing GDAL python unit test:" - Consider including an example with a float comparison. Those drive me nuts in the old style and I want to make sure people know about how to do that with pytest https://stackoverflow.com/questions/8560131/pytest-assert-almost-equal - Can you give a rough comparison of how long the existing and new styles take to run. A quick spot check says that they are pretty close with only 1604 looking to get worrisome. Are there any things that could be listed where people contribute that might speed up the testing? - Is there a way for folks with large machines / cloud instances to run the tests quicker without a lot of fiddling? - I'm not a fan of GH and PR abbreviations. Since this is on trac, it would be worth being more verbose On Wed, Dec 5, 2018 at 2:41 PM Craig de Stigter < craig.destig...@koordinates.com> wrote: > Hi > > I appreciate your comments on the pytest proposal and all the support to > help get it this far. Given no actionable improvements have been suggested, > and the feedback thus far seems encouraging... > > I move to adopt RFC 72: Run tests with pytest. > > https://trac.osgeo.org/gdal/wiki/rfc72_pytest > > > Cheers > Craig de Stigter > ___ > gdal-dev mailing list > gdal-dev@lists.osgeo.org > https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/gdal-dev -- -- http://schwehr.org ___ gdal-dev mailing list gdal-dev@lists.osgeo.org https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/gdal-dev
Re: [gdal-dev] Motion: adopt RFC 72: Run tests with pytest
+1 I watched the ticket traffic and shuddered :) Thank you. GDAL's testing probably predates five or six Python testing regimes/eras. I also have the concern about GDAL's testing going through Python, but this RFC will make it much easier for people to contribute and improve the story. Congratulations on a huge lift! Howard On 12/9/18 9:48 PM, Kurt Schwehr wrote: > I haven't had a chance to read the RFC yet, so I can't yet vote. However, > a huge thank you to Craig and everyone else who put in effort to make this > happen! > > On Sun, Dec 9, 2018 at 7:05 PM Craig de Stigter < > craig.destig...@koordinates.com> wrote: > >> Jonathan >> >>> it's worth spending a little thought on coming up with a scheme for >> test-ids. >> >> I've been through the list of parametrized tests and tweaked the `ids` >> kwargs to make them a little more helpful at first glance: >> https://github.com/OSGeo/gdal/pull/963/commits/8db599e7bc08b7dc73d81591898ed0f5f4243a58 >> >> I didn't see any way to use `pytest_make_parametrize_id` really; IDs >> rightly vary enough between tests that I can't see that hook being very >> useful here. >> >> Cheers >> Craig de Stigter >> >> On Mon, 10 Dec 2018 at 09:59 jratike80 < >> jukka.rahko...@maanmittauslaitos.fi> wrote: >> >>> +0 >>> >>> -Jukka Rahkonen- >>> >>> >>> Even Rouault-2 wrote PSC members, gentle reminder to cast your vote on this. Thanks, Even >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Sent from: http://osgeo-org.1560.x6.nabble.com/GDAL-Dev-f3742093.html >>> ___ >>> gdal-dev mailing list >>> gdal-dev@lists.osgeo.org >>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/gdal-dev >> ___ >> gdal-dev mailing list >> gdal-dev@lists.osgeo.org >> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/gdal-dev > > > > ___ > gdal-dev mailing list > gdal-dev@lists.osgeo.org > https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/gdal-dev signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ gdal-dev mailing list gdal-dev@lists.osgeo.org https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/gdal-dev
Re: [gdal-dev] Motion: adopt RFC 72: Run tests with pytest
I haven't had a chance to read the RFC yet, so I can't yet vote. However, a huge thank you to Craig and everyone else who put in effort to make this happen! On Sun, Dec 9, 2018 at 7:05 PM Craig de Stigter < craig.destig...@koordinates.com> wrote: > Jonathan > > > it's worth spending a little thought on coming up with a scheme for > test-ids. > > I've been through the list of parametrized tests and tweaked the `ids` > kwargs to make them a little more helpful at first glance: > https://github.com/OSGeo/gdal/pull/963/commits/8db599e7bc08b7dc73d81591898ed0f5f4243a58 > > I didn't see any way to use `pytest_make_parametrize_id` really; IDs > rightly vary enough between tests that I can't see that hook being very > useful here. > > Cheers > Craig de Stigter > > On Mon, 10 Dec 2018 at 09:59 jratike80 < > jukka.rahko...@maanmittauslaitos.fi> wrote: > >> +0 >> >> -Jukka Rahkonen- >> >> >> Even Rouault-2 wrote >> > PSC members, >> > >> > gentle reminder to cast your vote on this. >> > >> > Thanks, >> > >> > Even >> >> >> >> >> >> -- >> Sent from: http://osgeo-org.1560.x6.nabble.com/GDAL-Dev-f3742093.html >> ___ >> gdal-dev mailing list >> gdal-dev@lists.osgeo.org >> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/gdal-dev > > ___ > gdal-dev mailing list > gdal-dev@lists.osgeo.org > https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/gdal-dev -- -- http://schwehr.org ___ gdal-dev mailing list gdal-dev@lists.osgeo.org https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/gdal-dev
Re: [gdal-dev] Motion: adopt RFC 72: Run tests with pytest
Jonathan > it's worth spending a little thought on coming up with a scheme for test-ids. I've been through the list of parametrized tests and tweaked the `ids` kwargs to make them a little more helpful at first glance: https://github.com/OSGeo/gdal/pull/963/commits/8db599e7bc08b7dc73d81591898ed0f5f4243a58 I didn't see any way to use `pytest_make_parametrize_id` really; IDs rightly vary enough between tests that I can't see that hook being very useful here. Cheers Craig de Stigter On Mon, 10 Dec 2018 at 09:59 jratike80 wrote: > +0 > > -Jukka Rahkonen- > > > Even Rouault-2 wrote > > PSC members, > > > > gentle reminder to cast your vote on this. > > > > Thanks, > > > > Even > > > > > > -- > Sent from: http://osgeo-org.1560.x6.nabble.com/GDAL-Dev-f3742093.html > ___ > gdal-dev mailing list > gdal-dev@lists.osgeo.org > https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/gdal-dev ___ gdal-dev mailing list gdal-dev@lists.osgeo.org https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/gdal-dev
Re: [gdal-dev] Motion: adopt RFC 72: Run tests with pytest
+0 -Jukka Rahkonen- Even Rouault-2 wrote > PSC members, > > gentle reminder to cast your vote on this. > > Thanks, > > Even -- Sent from: http://osgeo-org.1560.x6.nabble.com/GDAL-Dev-f3742093.html ___ gdal-dev mailing list gdal-dev@lists.osgeo.org https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/gdal-dev
Re: [gdal-dev] Motion: adopt RFC 72: Run tests with pytest
Hi, PyTest is a great test-suite. If I may make one suggestion as someone who has used it for a while - it's worth spending a little thought on coming up with a scheme for test-ids. Especially if you're going to use parameterisation. Otherwise PyTest comes up with names that may be accurate (they're a concatenation of the parameters), but are relatively meaningless. For example "gdaladdo--100", "gdaladdo-foo", etc, as compared to more useful ids like "gdaladdo-too-low-input", "gdaladdo-bad-string-input" which tell you immediately what the test is actually meant to be testing. There's a hook called pytest_make_parametrize_id which allows you to create your own ids (I find the built-in methods of id generation either cumbersome, or bit-rot prone). I'm suggesting it now because it's more helpful if you do it from the start. Cheers, Jonathan On 2018-12-05 22:40, Craig de Stigter wrote: Hi I appreciate your comments on the pytest proposal and all the support to help get it this far. Given no actionable improvements have been suggested, and the feedback thus far seems encouraging... I move to adopt RFC 72: Run tests with pytest. https://trac.osgeo.org/gdal/wiki/rfc72_pytest Cheers Craig de Stigter ___ gdal-dev mailing list gdal-dev@lists.osgeo.org https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/gdal-dev ___ gdal-dev mailing list gdal-dev@lists.osgeo.org https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/gdal-dev
Re: [gdal-dev] Motion: adopt RFC 72: Run tests with pytest
+1 Daniel On 2018-12-07 6:15 a.m., Even Rouault wrote: PSC members, gentle reminder to cast your vote on this. Thanks, Even Hi I appreciate your comments on the pytest proposal and all the support to help get it this far. Given no actionable improvements have been suggested, and the feedback thus far seems encouraging... I move to adopt RFC 72: Run tests with pytest. https://trac.osgeo.org/gdal/wiki/rfc72_pytest Cheers Craig de Stigter -- Daniel Morissette Mapgears Inc T: +1 418-696-5056 #201 ___ gdal-dev mailing list gdal-dev@lists.osgeo.org https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/gdal-dev
Re: [gdal-dev] Motion: adopt RFC 72: Run tests with pytest
PSC members, gentle reminder to cast your vote on this. Thanks, Even > Hi > > I appreciate your comments on the pytest proposal and all the support to > help get it this far. Given no actionable improvements have been suggested, > and the feedback thus far seems encouraging... > > I move to adopt RFC 72: Run tests with pytest. > > https://trac.osgeo.org/gdal/wiki/rfc72_pytest > > > Cheers > Craig de Stigter -- Spatialys - Geospatial professional services http://www.spatialys.com ___ gdal-dev mailing list gdal-dev@lists.osgeo.org https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/gdal-dev
Re: [gdal-dev] Motion: adopt RFC 72: Run tests with pytest
On jeudi 6 décembre 2018 11:40:49 CET Craig de Stigter wrote: > Hi > > I appreciate your comments on the pytest proposal and all the support to > help get it this far. Given no actionable improvements have been suggested, > and the feedback thus far seems encouraging... > > I move to adopt RFC 72: Run tests with pytest. > > https://trac.osgeo.org/gdal/wiki/rfc72_pytest +1 Even -- Spatialys - Geospatial professional services http://www.spatialys.com ___ gdal-dev mailing list gdal-dev@lists.osgeo.org https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/gdal-dev
