Is PyFIT dead and abandoned?

Fuzzyman fuzzyman at
Tue Oct 7 11:40:38 CEST 2008

On Oct 7, 1:34 am, Ben Finney <bignose+hates-s... at>
> "James Mills" <prolo... at> writes:
> > On Tue, Oct 7, 2008 at 5:18 AM,  <oak... at> wrote:
> > > Has PyFIT been completely abandoned? Is there a better alternative or
> > > other resources to help me integrate fitnesse and python?
> > I for one am not interested in this kind of framework for testing -
> > and yet I come from a strict Software Engineering background where
> > this kind of User Acceptance and Requirements-based testing is
> > taught.
> How, then, do you automate functional testing of the full system?
> > I think you'll find most developers prefer to use unit test
> > frameworks and python has a great one built-in to the standard
> > library. In 99.9% of use cases, writing unit tests and well
> > documented and well designed, re-usable units of code is far better
> > than what any Requirements and Interactive testing framework could
> > ever offer.
> I completely disagree. Unit tests are essential for testing code
> *units*; e.g. functions and classes and attributes (oh my).They're a
> poor fit for testing the behaviour of the overall system: for that, a
> functional test suite is needed, and PyFIT seems to be a good .
> Automated unit tests and automated functional tests are complementary,
> and do not replace one another. Both are needed to have confidence in
> the code.

At Resolver Systems we have built our own functional test framework on
top of unittest. It automates the applications but uses the usual
'assert*' methods and patterns to make assertions about the
application state.


> --
>  \     “Injustice is relatively easy to bear; what stings is justice.” |
>   `\                                                 —Henry L. Mencken |
> _o__)                                                                  |
> Ben Finney


More information about the Python-list mailing list