2009/10/11 Michael Whapples <[email protected]>: > My problem with having unit tests included in a binary distribution is that > they take up space and have no way to be run, so can certainly be called a > waste of space. OK, may be they could be run by a user importing the correct > modules, etc, I meant no simple way (eg. as done in a source package with > the command > $ setup.py test
True, you need some test runner like nose or zope.tetsing or so. But then it works. > ). Also anyway what would the reason be for a user to run tests on the > binary module, I (or another developer in the cases of modified versions) > should have run the tests before distributing the binary package. Yes, but if something breaks it can be good to run the tests locally to see if something in the environments breaks them. Also tests can be useful as a sort of documentation. > OK, to possible solutions: > 1. Distribute offers the keyword argument "convert_2to3_doctests", may be it > could have one to give test directory, and then .py files in that could be > converted. Well, the test directory is test/test*.py. > 2. As setuptools automatically includes test/test*.py, why can't distribute > actually compile these files as well (I question whether tests in a test > directory should be prefixed with test, but I don't have a really strong > view should people disagree). The problem is that these files doesn't end up in the binary distribution and hence 2to3 can't be run on them. -- Lennart Regebro: Python, Zope, Plone, Grok http://regebro.wordpress.com/ +33 661 58 14 64 _______________________________________________ Distutils-SIG maillist - [email protected] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig
