2009/4/10 C. Titus Brown email@example.com:
2x "improve testing tools for py3k" -- variously focus on improving test coverage and testing wrappers.
One proposes to provide a nice wrapper to make nose and py.test capable of running the regrtests, which (with no change to regrtest) would let people run tests in parallel, distribute or run tests across multiple machines (including Snakebite), tag and run subsets of tests with personal and/or public tags, and otherwise take advantage of many of the nice features of nose and py.test.
The other proposes to measure & increase the code coverage of the py3k tests in both Python and C, integrate across multiple machines, and otherwise provide a nice set of integrated reports that anyone can generate on their own machines. This proposal, in particular, could move smoothly towards the effort to produce a "Python-wide" test suite for CPython/IronPython/PyPy/Jython. (This wasn't integrated into the proposal because I only found out about it after the proposals were due.)
I personally think that both testing proposals are good, and they grew out of conversations I had with Brett, who thinks that the general ideas are good. So, err, I'm looking for pushback, I guess ;). I can expand on these ideas a bit if people are interested.
Both proposals are medium at least, and I've personally been positively impressed with the student interaction.
To me, both of those proposals seem to say "measure and improve test coverage" or "nose integration" with a severe lack specific details. Especially the nose plugin one seems like very little work. (Running default nose in the test directory in fact works fairly well.)
Another small nit is that they should address Python 2.x, too.
-- Regards, Benjamin