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.

Regards,
Stephan
-- 
Stephan Richter
CBU Physics & Chemistry (B.S.) / Tufts Physics (Ph.D. student)
Web2k - Web Software Design, Development and Training
_______________________________________________
Zope-Dev maillist  -  Zope-Dev@zope.org
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - 
 http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
 http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )

Reply via email to