Jim Fulton wrote:
From the old testrunner, which I miss *a lot*, I could ensure I am
indeed running a specific module by doing...
Yup, this is one of the things I like least from the Zope 3 world.
What happened to proposals and community agreement before inflicting
big changes on other people who're trying to help out?
Oh cut the crap.
Hmm, I'm confused by this. If there's a proposal, my bad, point me at
it. If there isn't, well, it's kinda odd to receive abuse for pointing
out that you aren't sticking to your own processes...
The new test runner tries very hard to be backward
...but misses one of the most common use cases from the old one, and you
didn't seem particularly fussed about fixing this :-S
This breakage was not intentional. It was a bug. There is an
easy work around: just use the -m option.
It can't be that hard to put in some syntactic sugar to support this. I
was going to give it a shot myself but I ran out of time, and I worry
about things like the regex matching the old testrunner used to dowhen
using the missing option.
I particularly hate the fact that no real effort was put into
backwards compatibility, not to mention those silly weird
sort-of-fifty-dots-per-line thing that doesn't actually work.
What the heck are you talking about? What doesn't work?
Here's a literal screen dump:
--config-file C:\Zope\2.9i\etc\zope.conf --keepbytecode
Running tests at level 1
Running unit tests:
The zLOG package is deprecated and will be removed in Zope 2.11. Use the
Python logging module instead.
('New disk product detected, determining if we need '
Ran 63 tests with 0 failures and 0 errors in 6.009 seconds.
It looks bizarre having that carriage return in the middle of the row of
dots. What's the point of the change that Tres added his patch to avoid
Simplistix - Content Management, Zope & Python Consulting
Zope-CMF maillist - Zope-CMF@lists.zope.org
See http://collector.zope.org/CMF for bug reports and feature requests