Am 03.11.2011 um 05:12 schrieb Tres Seaver:
[...]
>> [8]FAILED winbot / z3c.form_py_265_32
>> https://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2011-November/052080.html
>
> Same as yesterday (and the day before, and the day before). Is nobody
> maintaining this package?
Roger worked on this pac
Hi All,
I'm experimenting with using nose as an alternative to zope.testrunner
so I can take advantage of the junit and cobertura compatible xml output
offered.
However, it appears that doctest counting is different between the two:
$ bin/test -m testfixtures.tests.test_docs
Running zope.test
Am 03.11.2011 um 05:12 schrieb Tres Seaver:
[...]
>> [7]FAILED ZTK 1.1dev / Python2.7.2 Linux 64bit
>> https://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2011-November/052087.html
> - - [7] are all the "unexpected Data.fs" bug in
> zope/testing/setupstack.txt. Can somebody who cares about that modu
Am 03.11.2011 um 08:25 schrieb Chris Withers:
> Hi All,
>
> I'm experimenting with using nose as an alternative to zope.testrunner
> so I can take advantage of the junit and cobertura compatible xml output
> offered.
[...]
> I'm paranoid that nose might not be running some tests that
> zope.tes
Hi Michael,
On 03/11/2011 09:12, Michael Howitz wrote:
> Run both test runners with the option -vv to see which tests are run.
> (I did this for your code and the list of tests seems to be equal.)
Cool, I'd done this already, but it's good to have someone else verify
this :-)
> Though this is n
On 2011-11-03, at 0025, Chris Withers wrote:
> I'm experimenting with using nose as an alternative to zope.testrunner
> so I can take advantage of the junit and cobertura compatible xml output
> offered.
Using http://pypi.python.org/pypi/collective.xmltestreport might be easier? Not
sure if i
On 03/11/2011 10:54, Matthew Wilkes wrote:
>
> On 2011-11-03, at 0025, Chris Withers wrote:
>
>> I'm experimenting with using nose as an alternative to zope.testrunner
>> so I can take advantage of the junit and cobertura compatible xml output
>> offered.
>
> Using http://pypi.python.org/pypi/colle
On Thu, Nov 3, 2011 at 5:14 AM, Chris Withers wrote:
> Hi Michael,
>
> On 03/11/2011 09:12, Michael Howitz wrote:
>> Run both test runners with the option -vv to see which tests are run.
>> (I did this for your code and the list of tests seems to be equal.)
It would be interesting for the rest of
On 03/11/2011 11:05, Jim Fulton wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 3, 2011 at 5:14 AM, Chris Withers wrote:
>> Hi Michael,
>>
>> On 03/11/2011 09:12, Michael Howitz wrote:
>>> Run both test runners with the option -vv to see which tests are run.
>>> (I did this for your code and the list of tests seems to be eq
On 11/03/2011 11:54 AM, Matthew Wilkes wrote:
> On 2011-11-03, at 0025, Chris Withers wrote:
>
>> I'm experimenting with using nose as an alternative to zope.testrunner
>> so I can take advantage of the junit and cobertura compatible xml output
>> offered.
> Using http://pypi.python.org/pypi/collec
On Thu, Nov 3, 2011 at 7:13 AM, Chris Withers wrote:
> The code uses Manuel, under both nose and zope.testrunner:
Manuel will report the same test count under both nose and
zope.testrunner but I don't know if nose respects the count provided.
You could put a breakpoint in TestCase.countTestCases
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 11/03/2011 04:57 AM, Michael Howitz wrote:
> Am 03.11.2011 um 05:12 schrieb Tres Seaver: [...]
>>> [7]FAILED ZTK 1.1dev / Python2.7.2 Linux 64bit
>>> https://mail.zope.org/pipermail/zope-tests/2011-November/052087.html
>
>>>
>> - - [7] are al
This is the summary for test reports received on the
zope-tests list between 2011-11-02 00:00:00 UTC and 2011-11-03 00:00:00 UTC:
See the footnotes for test reports of unsuccessful builds.
An up-to date view of the builders is also available in our
buildbot documentation:
http://docs.zope.org/
13 matches
Mail list logo
