pytest adoption: current status (beginning of May)

[Mads Kiilerich]

On 05/04/2015 09:01 PM, Thomas De Schampheleire wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> So the official part of 'pytest adoption month' is over, so it's high
> time to look back.

Yes, thanks a lot for the contributions. Just making it possible to run 
the tests with pytest was a significant amount of work. Awesome!

pytest is now a fine alternative to nosetests ... but with some caveats:

* it is running a different number of tests - I am not entirely sure the 
pytest coverage is a superset of nosetest

* we have some documentation of how to run tests with nosetests but no 
documentation for pytest

* it seems like nosetests makes it more clear what is failing and makes 
it easy to rerun specific tests after failing (even though it often 
doesn't work) but it doesn't seem as easy with pytest ... but that might 
be a documentation issue

* we haven't gotten much further than just being able to run the 
existing tests with pytest - we haven't seen any significant benefits 
from the new tooling yet

It might thus be possible to deprecate nosetest and switch to pytest but 
it seems like it wouldn't make a significant difference. We could thus 
keep supporting them both for now, with pytest as a very good 
alternative to nosetests.

/Mads