On Friday 02 November 2007, Christian Theune wrote:
> > I think that extras for tests are a necessary evil until we have
> > unscrewed the dependencies of the functional test setups.
> Depends on what 'unscrew' means. Functional test setups might want to
> demonstrate more in-depth, "real-life" scenarios where they have to
> introduce more dependencies than the actual package itself needs, so two
> sets of dependencies are needed anyway, or not?
He he, yep, you are right. The point I was trying to make is that unscrewing
the functional tests dependencies is a pointless exercise since you want to
demonstrate the functionality in one more realistic environment. Like you
said. And those dependencies might not match my use of the package.
BTW, I think you guys did a good job of separating the real and testing
dependencies for the Zope packages.
CBU Physics & Chemistry (B.S.) / Tufts Physics (Ph.D. student)
Web2k - Web Software Design, Development and Training
Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org
** No cross posts or HTML encoding! **
(Related lists -