[pytest-dev] Transfer of pyfakefs to pytest-dev?
hansemrbean
hansemrbean at googlemail.com
Tue Mar 9 11:48:37 EST 2021
Ok, thank you all - if there are no more opinions, I think I can take
that as a no - pyfakefs does not fit pytest-dev, and rest the case.
Thanks!
Am 07.03.2021 um 13:35 schrieb hansemrbean:
> I agree that QA is also about testing, but PyCQA seems to be more
> specific:
>
> > The PyCQA is a loose organization of people who maintain projects in
> roughly the same domain: automatic style and quality reporting. Almost
> all of these projects are widely used by the larger Python community
> (and by each other) to enforce style guidelines and maintain some
> modicum of consistency within a code base.
>
> pyfakefs as a library is more comparable to pytest-mock then to
> flake8, IMHO. In a sense, it is a bit like pytest-mock: it provides a
> wrapper around a mock for pytest, with the difference that the mock
> itself is also part of pyfakefs. I had briefly considered if it makes
> sense to make a separate pytest-fs package, that would provide the fs
> plugin based on pyfakefs (there has been a user complaining about the
> fact that pyfakefs registers a pytest plugin on installation, without
> explicitely being told so), but that would imply documentation
> duplication, and missing upwards compatibility. It would have been an
> option at the time of adding pytest support, but we missed that.
>
> Making pyfakefs a part of pytest-dev would not mean that it wouldn't
> support unittest anymore - it would just be a commitment for better
> pytest support, as I see it. If someone doesn't want to use it because
> of that, so be it, if you ask me... but I think most users will prefer
> technical reasoning.
>
> And as I said, I agree about small organizations. It needs a certain
> community size to be immune against the mentioned problems.
>
> Anyway, if it turns out that pyfakefs does not fit into pytest-dev, we
> will just wait. I'm still interested in that Cogs of test thing - if
> there are some other matching repositories (e.g. if there is a chance
> that it would be of sufficient size), it would sense to get that going
> instead.
>
> Cheers
>
> Am 07.03.2021 um 10:34 schrieb Sorin Sbarnea:
>> While most repos inside pcqa are quality-assurance tools instead of
>> just libraries, my personal view is that there is no reason to
>> distinguish between a library that you use to improve testing
>> ("quality assurance") and a tool that helps you achieve the same.
>>
>> As noted, pytest-dev is not ideal because is tool-oriented, like
>> other similar orgs as tox-dev or sphinx-contrib. Still, I would
>> personally prefer bypassing the rule and avoiding creating
>> yet-another-github-org (nope yagho is taken). The only danger I see
>> with move to pytest-dev is for pyfakefs itself because I am aware of
>> a group of people that are strongly opposed pytest due to the fact it
>> makes too easy for projects to endup having test suites that run only
>> with pytest (they value the freedom of test runner more than the
>> benefits).
>>
>> The way I see pycqa, is as being tool agnostic, with enough members
>> that can step in to help a project reaches an in-limbo state.
>>
>> Over the last years I transitioned or supported transition of python
>> libraries to any of the mentioned organization, and I am happy with
>> any of them. I trust them to be able to provide assistance when a
>> project is in need, they improve visibility of the project and makes
>> easier to foster connections with other people with similar
>> experience and mind-focus, like quality control.
>>
>> My main concern, with very small organizations, is that I did not
>> want to end-up with one that is controlled by one or two that have a
>> monetizing interest in it (as in pushing to promote themselves or
>> their companies directly). Bigger orgs with people that are there
>> only because they love open-source and value the community, are ideal.
>>
>> --
>> Cheers,
>> Sorin
>>
>>
>> On 7 Mar 2021 at 08:44:34, hansemrbean via pytest-dev
>> <pytest-dev at python.org <mailto:pytest-dev at python.org>> wrote:
>>
>> I don't think that pyfakefs will fit that - PyCQA is about
>> formatting / quality tools, while pyfakefs is a testing tool
>> (both for pytest and unittest).
>>
>> And I agree about having too many orgs - as far as I can see,
>> pytest-dev is currently the only organization concerned with
>> Python testing (there is nose-dev, but it only has nose and
>> nose2). With the current state, I would still say that pyfakefs
>> fits best with pytest-dev. A more general organization concerned
>> with Python testing would only make sense, if there are some
>> relevant repositories that would go into this - I just don't know
>> the goal and the potential repos for Cogs of testing (I like the
>> name, though :).
>>
>> Am 07.03.2021 um 09:10 schrieb Sorin Sbarnea:
>>
>>> Why not reusing existing
>>> https://github.com/PyCQA <https://github.com/PyCQA> for that? I
>>> am personally concerned about having too many orgs. One or two
>>> years ago we moved the doc8 tool from under opendev/openstack in
>>> order to make it easier to maintain.
>>>
>>> Its main goal seems to fit the repo quite well.
>>>
>>> On Sun, 7 Mar 2021 at 07:11, hansemrbean via pytest-dev
>>> <pytest-dev at python.org <mailto:pytest-dev at python.org>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> Thank you - I agree that pyfakefs is not a 100% fit, thus
>>> this mail
>>> instead of a formal request for transfer. I asked Bruno
>>> Oliviera (who
>>> helped with the pytest-order transfer) if he sees this as a
>>> possibility
>>> before writing this mail. I also had been searching for an
>>> organization
>>> related to general Python testing, but obviously didn't find
>>> one.
>>>
>>> Cogs of testing sounds interesting - was this meant for
>>> Python testing,
>>> or general testing? Are there other libraries that you would
>>> see there?
>>> Maybe there is a related thread or post you can refer me to...
>>>
>>> If the Cogs of testing organization can be brought to live,
>>> this may be
>>> an alternative, I just don't know how realistic this is. The
>>> main goal
>>> of the proposed transfer is indeed continued maintenance,
>>> and decreasing
>>> the bus factor. Still undecided myself...
>>>
>>> Cheers
>>>
>>> Am 06.03.2021 um 23:01 schrieb Ronny Pfannschmidt:
>>>
>>> > Hi,
>>> >
>>> > i'm not sure if this should go under pytest-dev,
>>> > if i had found the time to make
>>> https://github.com/cogs-of-testing
>>> <https://github.com/cogs-of-testing> be
>>> > actually practical/known yet, i'd sugest it for there.
>>> >
>>> > -- Ronny
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > Am 05.03.21 um 19:59 schrieb mrbean-bremen via pytest-dev:
>>> >> After the successful transfer of pytest-order (thank you
>>> for that
>>> >> smooth experience!), I have been thinking about the
>>> transfer of
>>> >> another library - pyfakefs - where I am a contributor. I
>>> have been
>>> >> discussing this with the package maintainer, John
>>> McGehee, who is
>>> >> also in favor for this, and decided to first ask here if
>>> that is
>>> >> feasible.
>>> >>
>>> >> pyfakefs (https://github.com/jmcgeheeiv/pyfakefs
>>> <https://github.com/jmcgeheeiv/pyfakefs>) is a library that
>>> >> mocks the file system. It has originally been developed
>>> by Mike Bland
>>> >> at Google, later transferred to GitHub (after the
>>> shutdown of Google
>>> >> Code in 2011), where John McGehee has forked it, added
>>> direct support
>>> >> for unittest and doctest, and has maintained it since
>>> then (with my
>>> >> help since a few years ago). Later a contributor added
>>> support for
>>> >> pytest via the fs fixture, with more support for pytest
>>> following
>>> >> eventually. Today the fs fixture is probably the main
>>> means to access
>>> >> pyfakefs, judging by the issues and the dependent
>>> repositories.
>>> >>
>>> >> So, while pyfakefs is not a pure pytest plugin, and it
>>> doesn't follow
>>> >> the naming convention pytest-xx, we thought that it would
>>> be a good
>>> >> idea to transfer it to pytest-dev, with the following goals:
>>> >>
>>> >> - ensure continued maintenance
>>> >>
>>> >> - increase compatibility with pytest and pytest-plugins
>>> >>
>>> >> - improve visibility of the package, especially for
>>> pytest developers
>>> >>
>>> >> - ideally, benefit from the larger community to get more
>>> code reviews
>>> >> and issue reports
>>> >>
>>> >> For reference see also
>>> https://github.com/jmcgeheeiv/pyfakefs/issues/590
>>> <https://github.com/jmcgeheeiv/pyfakefs/issues/590>
>>> >>
>>> >> What do you think? Thanks!
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>>
>>> --
>>> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus
>>> software.
>>> https://www.avast.com/antivirus
>>> <https://www.avast.com/antivirus>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> pytest-dev mailing list
>>> pytest-dev at python.org <mailto:pytest-dev at python.org>
>>> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pytest-dev
>>> <https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pytest-dev>
>>>
>>> --
>>> --
>>> /zbr
>>
>> <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=emailclient>
>> Virus-free. www.avast.com
>> <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=emailclient>
>>
>>
>> <#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
>> _______________________________________________
>> pytest-dev mailing list
>> pytest-dev at python.org <mailto:pytest-dev at python.org>
>> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pytest-dev
>> <https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pytest-dev>
>>
--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mail.python.org/pipermail/pytest-dev/attachments/20210309/36a11855/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the pytest-dev
mailing list