Hi, Am Freitag, den 02.11.2007, 10:53 -0400 schrieb Stephan Richter: > I only know of the general problem and not the specific one. Let's say you > have a package A with extras AE1 and AE2. Then you really have to write tests > for three installation cases: A, A with AE1, A with AE2. Currently we do not > have technology doing this. It gets even worse when you bring another package > into play. Let's say you have package B with extras BE1 and BE2 that depends > on package A. You now have to test (B, A), (B, A with AE1), (B, A with AE2), > (B with BE1, A), ... So the test scenarios multiply. It is just unmanageable. > To put the final nail in the coffin, extras are not even fully supported by > setuptools.
I do understand the `test extra` is a deviation from `test what you fly, fly what you test`. Which means that the `anti-extras` argument would require us to provide one package with the `pure tests` and put integration tests into another package, carefully selecting which combinations we want that demonstrate support for interoperability. > Overall I am in favor in switching to 'test_require'. Me too, although I see the point as stated above which is a counter argument. I'm somewhat indecisive right now, but I think that using test_require is better for the current situation than staying with the bad dependency mixture. Maybe some `test-only` integration packages would be nice, but I don't see anybody do the work. Christian -- gocept gmbh & co. kg - forsterstrasse 29 - 06112 halle (saale) - germany www.gocept.com - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - phone +49 345 122 9889 7 - fax +49 345 122 9889 1 - zope and plone consulting and development
Description: Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil
_______________________________________________ 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 )