On Mon, Mar 4, 2013 at 11:44 AM, David Cournapeau firstname.lastname@example.org:
On Mon, Mar 4, 2013 at 4:34 PM, Brett Cannon email@example.com wrote:
On Mon, Mar 4, 2013 at 11:29 AM, Barry Warsaw firstname.lastname@example.org wrote:
On Mar 04, 2013, at 07:26 PM, Robert Collins wrote:
It is of course possible for subunit and related tools to run their own implementation, but it seems ideal to me to have a common API which regular unittest, nose, py.test and others can all agree on and use : better reuse for pretty printers, GUI displays and the like depend on some common API.
And One True Way of invoking and/or discovering how to invoke, a
How does unittest's test discovery not solve that?
It is not always obvious how to test a package when one is not familiar with it. Are the tests in pkgname/tests or tests or ... ?
I would argue that's a packaging problem and not a testing infrastructure in the stdlib problem. If we want to standardize on always having the tests in a 'tests' sub-package that's fine, but I don't see unittest or subtest directly controlling that short of some registration hook that has to be called to declare where the tests are.