[issue10572] Move unittest test package to Lib/test

2010-11-29 Thread Éric Araujo

Changes by Éric Araujo mer...@netwok.org:


--
nosy: +eric.araujo

___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue10572
___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com



[issue10572] Move unittest test package to Lib/test

2010-11-29 Thread Ezio Melotti

Ezio Melotti ezio.melo...@gmail.com added the comment:

3.1 should also be considered if the tests are moved.  In theory this is not a 
bug fix so it shouldn't go in 3.1, but in practice it will make merging more 
difficult.  This might not be a strong argument though, considering that 3.1 
will accept only security fixes soon and only the few developers that work on 
unittest will be affected.

--
nosy: +ezio.melotti

___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue10572
___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com



[issue10572] Move unittest test package to Lib/test

2010-11-29 Thread Michael Foord

Michael Foord mich...@voidspace.org.uk added the comment:

The same is true for 2.7 though, and that is getting bug fixes. svnmerge would 
no longer work (and to making the change would mean moving the tests in a point 
release).

--

___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue10572
___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com



[issue10572] Move unittest test package to Lib/test

2010-11-29 Thread Alexander Belopolsky

Alexander Belopolsky belopol...@users.sourceforge.net added the comment:

+0, and I think we should hear from the maintainers of the affected packages 
first.  For packages that are also externally maintained moving tests out may 
cause inconvenience to the maintainer.

--
nosy: +barry, belopolsky, brett.cannon, ghaering, r.david.murray, rhettinger, 
tarek, theller

___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue10572
___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com



[issue10572] Move unittest test package to Lib/test

2010-11-29 Thread Michael Foord

Michael Foord mich...@voidspace.org.uk added the comment:

That list of examples was non-exhaustive, there is also tkinter.

--

___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue10572
___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com



[issue10572] Move unittest test package to Lib/test

2010-11-29 Thread Alexander Belopolsky

Changes by Alexander Belopolsky belopol...@users.sourceforge.net:


--
nosy: +gpolo

___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue10572
___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com



[issue10572] Move unittest test package to Lib/test

2010-11-29 Thread R. David Murray

R. David Murray rdmur...@bitdance.com added the comment:

For the email package I would be in favor of moving the tests to Lib/test.  
I've always found it a bit inconvenient that they are in Lib/email.  After 
hearing of Michael's intent with unittest, and given the evolution of email5 
into email5.1, I am also considering the possibility of packaging email6 (when 
I get to it!) as a patch set against email5, which would make this change less 
of an issue for email6 development.

The 2.7 sync issue is a concern, but there are certainly precedents for 
differing file layouts between 3.x and 2.7.  I'm willing myself to deal with 
this for email.

Barry may have a different opinion.

All of that said, this is a general enough issue that it may be appropriate to 
raise it on python-dev.  Even if exceptions are made for individual packages, 
it would be good to agree on a general best practices rule for this for the 
stdlib.

--

___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue10572
___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com



[issue10572] Move unittest test package to Lib/test

2010-11-29 Thread Barry A. Warsaw

Barry A. Warsaw ba...@python.org added the comment:

grepping the code without the tests doesn't seem that compelling a use case to 
me, given that grep and find both provide options to prune directories.  I do 
think that moving the tests out of the email package will make it harder to 
maintain and distribute as a separate package.  However, if RDM thinks the 
burden won't be too high, and the advantages of a split outweigh the 
disadvantages, then I defer to him.  I would still make a case for distributing 
email6 as a package available on Cheeseshop though, otherwise it just won't get 
much independent use until it's in the stdlib.

--

___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue10572
___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com



[issue10572] Move unittest test package to Lib/test

2010-11-29 Thread R. David Murray

R. David Murray rdmur...@bitdance.com added the comment:

Yes, a cheeseshop package is definitely part of the plan, I didn't mean to 
imply otherwise.  It won't be hard to automate the packaging, and indeed I'll 
wind up doing that anyway even if the tests stay inside Lib/email.

I will say that that I'm probably only +0.5 on this change...I like it from a 
consistency standpoint (heading toward all stdlib tests being in Lib/test) and 
it seems like it would make the job of packagers who desire a 'no tests' option 
easier.  But things have been working fine as they are, which is why I'm not at 
a full +1 :).

--

___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue10572
___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com



[issue10572] Move unittest test package to Lib/test

2010-11-29 Thread Éric Araujo

Éric Araujo mer...@netwok.org added the comment:

For distutils tests, I’m ±0.  I don’t see any major drawback nor any major 
benefit.  Tarek will decide.

--

___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue10572
___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com



[issue10572] Move unittest test package to Lib/test

2010-11-29 Thread Raymond Hettinger

Raymond Hettinger rhettin...@users.sourceforge.net added the comment:

Of those, it makes the most sense to move the json tests to Lib/tests.  Bob is 
not externally maintaining the 3.x version.  It's all our now.

Also, it looks like importlib is in a maintenance mode now.

There is merit to keeping 2to3, ctypes, sqlite tests separate.

Currently all of the documentation files are still under Doc so we should keep 
it that way and not move them under package directory trees.

--

___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue10572
___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com



[issue10572] Move unittest test package to Lib/test

2010-11-29 Thread Brett Cannon

Brett Cannon br...@python.org added the comment:

I have no issue with moving importlib into Lib/test as long as I can still run 
the tests with ``python3 -m test.importlib``. I actually only put the tests in 
importlib.tests because that was common practice amongst newer packages in the 
stdlib.

And just to prevent some rumour from perpetuating, importlib is not in 
maintenance mode. In fact the API was heavily reworked in 3.2 and I plan on 
exposing more of the API publicly in 3.3 and hopefully to bootstrap as well. 
The only thing you could think is in maintenance mode is importlib's Chesseshop 
package, but that's just for 2.x compatibility and for Django's benefit.

--

___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue10572
___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com



[issue10572] Move unittest test package to Lib/test

2010-11-28 Thread Michael Foord

New submission from Michael Foord mich...@voidspace.org.uk:

Having tests in Lib/test instead of inside the package makes it easier to grep 
the unittest package without grepping the tests. The Windows installer has an 
install without tests option which is easier to honour if the tests aren't in 
the package.

However, currently all packages that have test *packages* have the tests in the 
package rather than inside Lib/test. (There are no test packages inside 
Lib/test.)

Examples: email, distutils, ctypes, importlib, json, lib2to3, sqlite3

I also maintain an external port of unittest from Python 3. This is 
unittest2-py3k. Moving the tests would make it *slightly* harder to keep this 
in sync. I'm moving to maintaining this port as a set of patches rather than a 
separate branch. These patches can be applied automatically to unittest from 
py3k head. unittest2-py3k will be built automatically by a script, so it isn't 
a big deal.

--
assignee: michael.foord
keywords: easy
messages: 122751
nosy: michael.foord
priority: normal
severity: normal
status: open
title: Move unittest test package to Lib/test
type: behavior
versions: Python 3.2

___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue10572
___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com