FWIW some notes on mitmproxy and ngrep - helpful tools when intercepting and
recording HTTP traffic.
mitmproxy/mitmdump: I know doesn’t serve the same purpose as VCR but its
helpful to be able to capture and see what is going on between server and
client when Mailman tests are running.
Am 02.01.2015 um 05:40 schrieb Barry Warsaw:
On Dec 27, 2014, at 01:16 PM, Florian Fuchs wrote:
So far we haven't found a perfect solution for testing packages that
rely heavily on the MM3 REST API. As far as mailman.client, Postorius
and HK are concerned, testing without *some* core
Am 29.12.2014 um 00:26 schrieb Barry Warsaw:
On Dec 28, 2014, at 01:51 PM, Aurelien Bompard wrote:
As I mentioned, I think LMTP *could* work, but REST (inside HK) could
work too. Aurelien, what do you think?
I'd go with REST, it seems more flexible and we already have nice libraries
for
Am 02.01.2015 um 06:14 schrieb Sumana Harihareswara:
* I'd love to get to hack with some of you in person. Are any of you
planning on going to the PyCon sprints in Montreal April 13-16?
Yup.
* I saw in the
https://mail.python.org/pipermail/mailman-developers/2014-November/024056.html
Am 29.12.2014 um 00:27 schrieb Barry Warsaw:
On Dec 27, 2014, at 08:41 AM, Florian Fuchs wrote:
How about a third option, a generic pub/sub or event archiver,
implemented in py3? It would meet all the above criteria (archivers on other
systems, no dependency on py3 -- or Python for that
My understanding is that VCR will capture the HTTP test request/responses and
comparison to some baseline will indicate that the API is behaving as expected.
Forgive me if I’m misunderstanding something fundamental about the VCR based
testing approach. Some questions to helop me understand:
I feel like prefacing all my questions with an apology if it’s a dumb question.
Anyway...
What’s the advantage of using VCR over a set of tests that use Kenneth Reitz
requests library to send HTTP queries to the API and have a look at the
response to see if it contains the expected HTTP
