Hi On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 4:24 PM, Mark McLoughlin <mar...@redhat.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 2013-11-12 at 13:11 -0800, Shawn Hartsock wrote: > > Maybe we should have some 60% rule... that is: If you change more than > > half of a test... you should *probably* rewrite the test in Mock. > > A rule needs a reasoning attached to it :) > > Why do we want people to use mock? > > Is it really for Python3? If so, I assume that means we've ruled out the > python3 port of mox? (Ok by me, but would be good to hear why) And, if > that's the case, then we should encourage whoever wants to port mox > based tests to mock. > > The upstream maintainer is not going to port mox to python3 so we have a fork of mox called mox3. Ideally, we would drop the usage of mox in favour of mock so we don't have to carry a forked mox. > Or maybe it has nothing to do with Python3 at all? Maybe we just like > mock more? But do we like it enough to have a mixture of mock and mox > across the codebase? > > Mark. > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > From: "John Garbutt" <j...@johngarbutt.com> > > > To: "Mark McLoughlin" <mar...@redhat.com>, "OpenStack Development > Mailing List (not for usage questions)" > > > <openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org> > > > Sent: Tuesday, November 12, 2013 9:31:25 AM > > > Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Do we have some guidelines for > mock, stub, mox when writing unit test? > > > > > > On 11 November 2013 23:18, Mark McLoughlin <mar...@redhat.com> wrote: > > > > On Mon, 2013-11-11 at 12:07 +0000, John Garbutt wrote: > > > >> On 11 November 2013 10:27, Rosa, Andrea (HP Cloud Services) > > > >> <andrea.r...@hp.com> wrote: > > > >> > Hi > > > >> > > > > >> >>Generally mock is supposed to be used over mox now for python 3 > support. > > > >> > > > > >> > That is my understanding too > > > >> > > > >> +1 > > > >> > > > >> But I don't think we should waste all our time re-writing all our > mox > > > >> and stub tests. Lets just leave this to happen organically for now > as > > > >> we add and refactor tests. We probably need to take the hit at some > > > >> point, but that doesn't feel like we should do that right now. > > > > > > > > Hmm, I don't follow this stance. > > > > > > > > Adding Python3 support is a goal we all share. > > > > > > > > If we're saying that the use of mox stands in the way of that goal, > but > > > > that we'd really prefer if people didn't work on porting tests from > mox > > > > to mock yet ... then are we saying we don't value people working on > > > > porting to Python3? > > > > > > > > And if we plan to use a Python3 compatible version of mox[1], then > isn't > > > > the Python3 argument irrelevant and saying "use mock for new tests" > just > > > > means we'll end up with a mixture of mox and mock? > > > > > > Good point, I forgot about the port of mox to python3. > > > > > > I liked the idea of "prefer mock", with a view that at some point in > > > the future there is only a small amount of mox related code left, that > > > can easily get moved to mock. > > > > > > I guess its a trade off between review capacity, risk of breaking > > > existing tests, and risk of never reaching that end goal. > > > > > > We already have stubs and mox, which do tend to fight each other, > > > adding a third does seem like a bad plan, unless there is a very good > > > reason, which I always had in my head as python3 support. Hmm... I do > > > prefer mock to mox, but not that strongly. > > > > > > John > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > OpenStack-dev mailing list > > > OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org > > > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > OpenStack-dev mailing list > OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev >
_______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev