> For the qadevel projects I'm aware of, we've been using pytest for our
> unit/functional test runner.
>
> As part of the shared configuration, tests are split up into two
> categories, unit and functional. Unit tests are fast, do not touch the
> network, database or filesystem (there are some ex
> > I also want to avoid increasing the maintenance burden of having a
> > bunch of tests that look for things which don't really need to be
> > tested (setting data members, checking default values etc.)
>
> I agree, there is stuff that kind of can be taken for granted.
Coincidentally, I have an
> That being said, I don't really want to start off with tests that are
> putting too many asserts into the one test. Some combinations are fine
> but I'd prefer erring on the side of separating things out a bit too
> much for now rather than risk setting an example of large, monolithic
> tests.
I
On Thu, 6 Mar 2014 05:44:15 -0500 (EST)
Kamil Paral wrote:
> > For the qadevel projects I'm aware of, we've been using pytest for
> > our unit/functional test runner.
> >
> > As part of the shared configuration, tests are split up into two
> > categories, unit and functional. Unit tests are fast
> Any thoughts on which of those (if either) would be better?
I do not really mind either, and do not have any strong preference. I'm used to
having the non-functional tests run by default, but I can easily manage any way
we decide to do it.
j.
___
qa
> Sure, I'm game for changing that. The two args that come to mind are:
>
> * --long (more generic than functional)
> * --func (short for functional)
>
> Any thoughts on which of those (if either) would be better?
I'd vote for --func, it retains the original meaning.
__
- Original Message -
> From: "Tim Flink"
> To: qa-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Sent: Thursday, March 6, 2014 3:29:32 PM
> Subject: Re: Default invocation of pytest for qadevel projects
>
> On Thu, 6 Mar 2014 05:44:15 -0500 (EST)
> Kamil Paral wrote:
>
> > > For the qadevel projects I
