Lennart Regebro a écrit :
> On Sun, Apr 18, 2010 at 10:37, Christophe Combelles <cc...@free.fr> wrote:
>> Depending on setuptools for tests in another evil thing. We should not
>> assume a
>> *setup* tool to be a testrunner, and we should not depend on the behaviour of
>> setuptools to write tests.
> I'm not sure what you mean there, setuptools doesn't behave in any
> particular way when running tests.
ok, not a lot, there is currently one single particular behaviour, which is
adding tests from the result of the "additional_tests" function in a module.
That probably won't hurt.
>> Setuptools is already doing too many things and Tarek
>> is taking care (with distutils2 and distribute) to cleany separate the
>> functionalities, such as installing, distributing, etc.
> Yes, but that work is not done yet. And one thing that's needed to be
> able to run the tests under Python 3 is building it. So it's hard to
> separate the building and the running of testsm as a Python 3 capable
> testrunner would need to run setup.py build first anyway. Which means
> you depends on setuptools/distribute whichever way you turn.
>> Testing is not related to configuring nor installing, and "python setup.py
>> is no more meaningful than "python setup.py makethecoffee".
> It might seem so, but it is unfortunately not true when considering Python 3.
Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org
** No cross posts or HTML encoding! **
(Related lists -