On Wed, Mar 11, 2009 at 4:49 PM, Stefan Behnel <stefan_ml@behnel.de> wrote:
Guido van Rossum wrote:
On Sun, Feb 1, 2009 at 2:29 PM, Christian Heimes wrote:
I'm +1 for a simple (!) test discovery system. I'm emphasizing on simple because there are enough frameworks for elaborate unit testing.
Such a tool should
- find all modules and packages named 'tests' for a given package name
I predict that this part is where you'll have a hard time getting consensus. There are lots of different naming conventions. It would be nice if people could use the new discovery feature without having to move all their tests around.
Still, there should be one way to do it, so that future projects can start to use a common pattern. I actually think the selection of such a pattern can be completely arbitrary, as it will be impossible to get a clear vote on this.
Obviously, the OWTDI does not lift the requirement that the test finder must support alternate patterns to make it work smoothly with existing test suites. It's just meant to avoid the configuration overhead if you do it 'the right way'.
A little unrelated to your reply but thanks for "reviving" the thread. I still have the intention to do the proposed idea, I just happened to have very busy weeks, month, etc.. new house and others.
Stefan
Regards, -- -- Guilherme H. Polo Goncalves