On Mon, Mar 4, 2013 at 11:44 AM, David Cournapeau <cournape@gmail.com> wrote:

On Mon, Mar 4, 2013 at 4:34 PM, Brett Cannon <brett@python.org> wrote:
>
>
>
> On Mon, Mar 4, 2013 at 11:29 AM, Barry Warsaw <barry@python.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 package's
>> test suite.
>
>
> 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.