pytest adoption: current status (beginning of May)

[Jan Heylen]

On Wed, May 6, 2015 at 3:46 AM, Mads Kiilerich <mads at kiilerich.com> wrote:
> 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

I must say without any prior knowledge of pytest before I started
using it (yesterday), it is as simple as excecuting 'py.test' in the
root of your kallithea repo.

The only line to add to the docs is: "You can run the test with
pytest: just execute 'py.test' in the root of kallithea repo" and the
other documentation is the documentation of pytest, creating a subset
of this documentation is not useful in my opinion, better a reference
to https://pytest.org/latest/usage.html ?

>
> * 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
py.test kallithea/tests/functional/test_changeset_comments.py
or another e.g. (as seen in https://pytest.org/latest/usage.html)
py.test -k "not api

What makes you say pytest has less clear info on what is failing? As
it has no immediate output when a test fails? (maybe checkout the -x
option)

>
> * 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
for me it looks better, it is one command to do the tests, and gives
very decent output when failing.

>
> 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.
Indeed, both for now

>
> /Mads
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> kallithea-general mailing list
> kallithea-general at sfconservancy.org
> http://lists.sfconservancy.org/mailman/listinfo/kallithea-general