Mailman-Developers January 2013

mailman-developers@python.org

6 participants
27 discussions

Re: [Mailman-Developers] (no subject)
by Barry Warsaw 23 Jan '13

23 Jan '13

On Jan 21, 2013, at 10:40 AM, Sandesh Agrawal wrote: >I am writing a test for lmtp runner as follows: > >def test_function(self): > self._lmtp.sendmail(.........) > messages = get_queue_messages('in') > self.assertEqual(len(messages), 1) > > self._lmtp.sendmail(.........) > messages = get_queue_messages('in') > self.assertEqual(len(messages), 1) > > >and the test passes successfully , but shouldn't the second >self.assertEqual( ) fail because number of messages in 'in' should now >be 2 . One thing you can do when running tests that use runners in subprocesses (e.g. spawned by TestableMaster), is pass in the -e option to bin/test so that logging in the subprocesses is enabled. Such logging is suppressed by default because of the noise, but enabling it lets you see if an exception occurs in a runner that might only show up in the logs. >Might be, self._lmtp is creating new lmtp instance each time it >executes sendmail( ) , or is there something else ? I don't think it does. My first guess is that there's an exception getting masked. Cheers, -Barry

2 1

Re: [Mailman-Developers] [Merge] lp:~sakuag333/mailman/BUG_non_queue_runner into lp:mailman
by Barry Warsaw 22 Jan '13

22 Jan '13

On Jan 21, 2013, at 08:35 AM, Sandesh Agrawal wrote: >These lines were changed in my earlier commit, which required certain >fixing. So i re-changed these lines to the original one in my recent >commit to the branch. Hence bazaar was showing all that in the commit >history. It's important to learn how to work with feature/bug branches in Bazaar. It's not that difficult really, you just want to create a new branch per bug or feature that you're working on. If you have one feature branch that depends on another feature branch, you can use something like looms or pipelines to stack your branches. But in general, you want to make sure it's one-branch-per-bug-or-feature. >At present i am using jus gedit to do all my coding, which edtor is >best to be used so that i do not run into these problems ? I'm biased about Emacs because I've used it for a bazillion years. With the python-mode here <https://launchpad.net/python-mode> plus tools like global-whitespace-mode, pyflakes, and bzr-tools-grep, I think Emacs is a wonderful development environment. By default, this will use only spaces for indentation. Other editors are good too if you can configure them correctly, but others will have to chime in about them. Cheers, -Barry

1 0

Re: [Mailman-Developers] (no subject)
by Sandesh Agrawal 21 Jan '13

21 Jan '13

> Might be, self._lmtp is creating new lmtp instance each time it > executes sendmail( ) , or is there something else ? by lmtp instace, i meant a new smtp.LMTP( ) instance is being made each time we call self._lmtp.sendmail( )

1 0

(no subject)
by Sandesh Agrawal 21 Jan '13

21 Jan '13

I am writing a test for lmtp runner as follows: def test_function(self): self._lmtp.sendmail(.........) messages = get_queue_messages('in') self.assertEqual(len(messages), 1) self._lmtp.sendmail(.........) messages = get_queue_messages('in') self.assertEqual(len(messages), 1) and the test passes successfully , but shouldn't the second self.assertEqual( ) fail because number of messages in 'in' should now be 2 . Might be, self._lmtp is creating new lmtp instance each time it executes sendmail( ) , or is there something else ? Cheers, Sandesh

1 0

Re: [Mailman-Developers] [Merge] lp:~sakuag333/mailman/BUG_non_queue_runner into lp:mailman
by Sandesh Agrawal 21 Jan '13

21 Jan '13

> PEP 8 has a line length limit of 79 characters, so this line needs to be > wrapped. > PEP 8 requires a single space both before and after the = sign. > Thanks for pointing this out. I will get myself familial with PEP 8. > > === modified file 'src/mailman/core/switchboard.py' > --- src/mailman/core/switchboard.py 2013-01-01 14:05:42 +0000 > +++ src/mailman/core/switchboard.py 2013-01-17 07:44:42 +0000 >> @@ -90,9 +90,10 @@ >> 'Not a power of 2: {0}'.format(numslices)) >> self.name = name >> self.queue_directory = queue_directory >> + self.non_queue_runner={'lmtp','rest'} > > This should no longer be necessary, right? (I hope it's not! :) >> # Fast track for no slices >> self._lower = None >> self._upper = None >> @@ -143,11 +144,11 @@ >> data['_parsemsg'] = (protocol == 0) >> # Write to the pickle file the message object and metadata. >> with open(tmpfile, 'w') as fp: >> - fp.write(msgsave) >> - cPickle.dump(data, fp, protocol) >> - fp.flush() >> - os.fsync(fp.fileno()) >> - os.rename(tmpfile, filename) >> + fp.write(msgsave) >> + cPickle.dump(data, fp, protocol) >> + fp.flush() >> + os.fsync(fp.fileno()) >> + os.rename(tmpfile, filename) > > Why were these lines changed? The tabs are not allowed in Mailman code. > These lines were changed in my earlier commit, which required certain fixing. So i re-changed these lines to the original one in my recent commit to the branch. Hence bazaar was showing all that in the commit history. > Be careful about trailing whitespace! You might want to set your editor to > warn you about these, or display such whitespace. > At present i am using jus gedit to do all my coding, which edtor is best to be used so that i do not run into these problems ? Thanks for the feedback :) Cheers, Sandesh

1 0

Re: [Mailman-Developers] (no subject)
by Barry Warsaw 16 Jan '13

16 Jan '13

On Jan 17, 2013, at 04:10 AM, Sandesh Agrawal wrote: >I think that the new test function that i need to add to test_lmtp.py >has to be added to some configuration file or some base class because >while running ./bin/test -vv -t TestLMTP , it runs only 4 tests (for >the functions originally defined in test_lmtp.py) and my new function >added is ignored. I could not figure out the process of adding a new >test function to it. You shouldn't have to. Name the method `test_<whatever>` and testrunner should find it automatically. If that's not happening, push what you have and I'll look at it. -Barry

2 1

Re: [Mailman-Developers] (no subject)
by Barry Warsaw 16 Jan '13

16 Jan '13

On Jan 17, 2013, at 03:14 AM, Sandesh Agrawal wrote: >Is there a way of unning only test_lmtp.py to test lmtp runner or do i >need to do the full test using ./bin/test . Yes, you can run various subsets of tests by using the -t option. MM3 currently uses zope.testrunner. All the gory details: http://pypi.python.org/pypi/zope.testrunner >I tried runnign both of the below >./bin/test ./src/mailman/runners/tests/test_lmtp.py/ >./bin/py ./src/mailman/runners/tests/test_lmtp.py >What is the correct way of running the unit test for lmtp runner ? `bin/test -t TestLMTP` would run all the tests in that class. Or, e.g. `bin/test -t test_message_id_required` to run an individual test. -t accepts other patterns, and I always add -vv to get more verbosity. Cheers, -Barry

2 1

Re: [Mailman-Developers] (no subject)
by Sandesh Agrawal 16 Jan '13

16 Jan '13

Is there a way of unning only test_lmtp.py to test lmtp runner or do i need to do the full test using ./bin/test . I tried runnign both of the below ./bin/test ./src/mailman/runners/tests/test_lmtp.py/ ./bin/py ./src/mailman/runners/tests/test_lmtp.py with this added in test_lmtp.py if __name__ == '__main__': unittest.main() But it did not ran as desired. What is the correct way of running the unit test for lmtp runner ?

1 0

Re: [Mailman-Developers] (no subject)
by Sandesh Agrawal 16 Jan '13

16 Jan '13

On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 3:07 AM, Sandesh Agrawal <sakuag333(a)gmail.com>wrote: > Yes, that was the only failure :)

1 0

Re: [Mailman-Developers] (no subject)
by Barry Warsaw 16 Jan '13

16 Jan '13

On Jan 17, 2013, at 03:00 AM, Sandesh Agrawal wrote: >But since , is_non_queue_runner is set True for lmtp and rest runner, >switchboard instance is not created for them , hence config.switchboards does >not have an entry for lmtp and rest. Is this another bug in the way of >fetching available queues ? No, it's just an expected failure with the elimination of the lmtp and rest queues. The code is doing the right thing, but the doctest needs updating. Was that the only failure? If so, that's a good sign! Cheers, -Barry

1 0

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

2003

2002

2001

2000

1999

1998

1997

Mailman-Developers January 2013