Re: Macronize %pytest
On 27. 04. 20 11:34, Miro Hrončok wrote:
Hello Python packagers,
since there is no upstream supported universal test invocation for Python
(`python setup.py test` is deprecated and the de-facto-standard `tox` doesn't
always do what we want in RPM's %check and/or is not always used by upstreams)
and a lot of upstreams use pytest, I'd like to propose a %pytest macros, for
standardizing the way pytest is run.
Usage:
%check
%pytest
Or with options passed to pyets:
%check
%pytest -v -m "not network" tests/
(Here ends the tl;dr version.)
Why not just use `pytest` or `%{python3} -m pytest` instead of `%pytest`?
We want to *test the code we ship*. In the general case this involves:
1. Prepending sys.path with %{buildroot}%{python3_sitelib} (and/or sitearch)
2. Prepending $PATH with %{buildroot}%{_bindir}
3. Ensuring $PWD is not in sys.path
So the idea is...
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/python-rpm-macros/pull-request/55
--
Miro Hrončok
--
Phone: +420777974800
IRC: mhroncok
___
python-devel mailing list -- python-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to python-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/python-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Macronize %pytest
On 27. 04. 20 15:47, Scott Talbert wrote: On Mon, 27 Apr 2020, Miro Hrončok wrote: Hello Python packagers, since there is no upstream supported universal test invocation for Python (`python setup.py test` is deprecated and the de-facto-standard `tox` doesn't always do what we want in RPM's %check and/or is not always used by upstreams) and a lot of upstreams use pytest, I'd like to propose a %pytest macros, for standardizing the way pytest is run. Usage: %check %pytest Or with options passed to pyets: %check %pytest -v -m "not network" tests/ I like the idea! I have run into the issue of not wanting $PWD in sys.path before as well, so it would be great to solve that. Will pu(n)t it to my far future TODO. The only other thing that I might suggest is to set PYTHONDONTWRITEBYTECODE=1 so we don't get pytest bytecode written out. Good point, will do. Thanks. -- Miro Hrončok -- Phone: +420777974800 IRC: mhroncok ___ python-devel mailing list -- python-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to python-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/python-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: [Fedora-packaging] Re: Macronize %pytest
On Mon, Apr 27, 2020 at 11:58 AM Nicolas Mailhot wrote: > > Le lundi 27 avril 2020 à 11:34 +0200, Miro Hrončok a écrit : > > Hello Python packagers, > > > > Usage: > > > >%check > >%pytest > > > > Or with options passed to pyets: > > > >%check > >%pytest -v -m "not network" tests/ > > I ended up renaming similar macros as %foocheck (after several false > starts). > > Having a domain-specific macro named slightly differently than the rpm > section it is supposed to occur in was tripping packagers all the time. > The problem in Python land is that there are multiple different options for tests, even with setuptools or whatnot. So some knowledge of the tool is required, since there is no standardized interface anymore (setup.py test is going away). -- 真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth! ___ python-devel mailing list -- python-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to python-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/python-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Macronize %pytest
On Mon, 27 Apr 2020, Miro Hrončok wrote:
Hello Python packagers,
since there is no upstream supported universal test invocation for Python
(`python setup.py test` is deprecated and the de-facto-standard `tox` doesn't
always do what we want in RPM's %check and/or is not always used by
upstreams) and a lot of upstreams use pytest, I'd like to propose a %pytest
macros, for standardizing the way pytest is run.
Usage:
%check
%pytest
Or with options passed to pyets:
%check
%pytest -v -m "not network" tests/
(Here ends the tl;dr version.)
Why not just use `pytest` or `%{python3} -m pytest` instead of `%pytest`?
We want to *test the code we ship*. In the general case this involves:
1. Prepending sys.path with %{buildroot}%{python3_sitelib} (and/or sitearch)
2. Prepending $PATH with %{buildroot}%{_bindir}
3. Ensuring $PWD is not in sys.path
So the idea is (untested):
%pytest_cmd /usr/bin/pytest
%pytest %{expand:
PYTHONPATH="${PYTHONPATH:-%{buildroot}%{python3_sitearch}:%{buildroot}%{python3_sitelib}}"
\
PATH="%{buildroot}%{_bindir}:$PATH" \
%pytest_cmd
}
Where PYTHONPATH solves (1), PATH solves (2) and using `/usr/bin/pytest` over
`%{python3} -m pytest` kinda solves (3).
I say "kinda" because using `python -m pytest` explicitly adds $PWD to
sys.path, but using `pytest` doesn't always prevent it.
https://docs.pytest.org/en/latest/usage.html#calling-pytest-through-python-m-pytest
I've been trying to completely solve (3) in my head in a general way, but it
always involves `cd`ing to a temporary directory before running the tests,
but plenty of test suites cannot handle that gracefully.
Unfortunately Python interpreter doesn't have a flag that says "don't add
current directory to sys.path, but respect $PYTHONPATH". In the long term, we
might propose to add it.
I like the idea!
I have run into the issue of not wanting $PWD in sys.path before as well,
so it would be great to solve that.
The only other thing that I might suggest is to
set PYTHONDONTWRITEBYTECODE=1 so we don't get pytest bytecode written out.
Scott___
python-devel mailing list -- python-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to python-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/python-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Macronize %pytest
Hello Python packagers,
since there is no upstream supported universal test invocation for Python
(`python setup.py test` is deprecated and the de-facto-standard `tox` doesn't
always do what we want in RPM's %check and/or is not always used by upstreams)
and a lot of upstreams use pytest, I'd like to propose a %pytest macros, for
standardizing the way pytest is run.
Usage:
%check
%pytest
Or with options passed to pyets:
%check
%pytest -v -m "not network" tests/
(Here ends the tl;dr version.)
Why not just use `pytest` or `%{python3} -m pytest` instead of `%pytest`?
We want to *test the code we ship*. In the general case this involves:
1. Prepending sys.path with %{buildroot}%{python3_sitelib} (and/or sitearch)
2. Prepending $PATH with %{buildroot}%{_bindir}
3. Ensuring $PWD is not in sys.path
So the idea is (untested):
%pytest_cmd /usr/bin/pytest
%pytest %{expand:
PYTHONPATH="${PYTHONPATH:-%{buildroot}%{python3_sitearch}:%{buildroot}%{python3_sitelib}}"
\
PATH="%{buildroot}%{_bindir}:$PATH" \
%pytest_cmd
}
Where PYTHONPATH solves (1), PATH solves (2) and using `/usr/bin/pytest` over
`%{python3} -m pytest` kinda solves (3).
I say "kinda" because using `python -m pytest` explicitly adds $PWD to sys.path,
but using `pytest` doesn't always prevent it.
https://docs.pytest.org/en/latest/usage.html#calling-pytest-through-python-m-pytest
I've been trying to completely solve (3) in my head in a general way, but it
always involves `cd`ing to a temporary directory before running the tests, but
plenty of test suites cannot handle that gracefully.
Unfortunately Python interpreter doesn't have a flag that says "don't add
current directory to sys.path, but respect $PYTHONPATH". In the long term, we
might propose to add it.
Where to have the macro defined? (Skip this part if not interested.)
I was thinking:
a) pytest package
b) pytest subpackage (required if rpm-build)
c) python3-rpm-macros
d) python-rpm-macros
e) pyproject-rpm-macros
And here is the pros and cons:
a+) self contained, can change with upstream if needed
a+) always present with pytest
a-) pytest must co-own macro dir or depend on rpm-build
b+) same as a+, but not a-
b-) additional layer of complexity
c+) easy
c+) the macro doesn't need to require pytest, can be used with arbitrary command
c+) can be generalized to non-pytest later if desired
c-) when pytest CLI changes significantly, we need to change it in different
package (but we are not using pytets CLI now at all, just Python/Shell
environment variables)
c~) technically not always present with pytest, but always present with
python3-devel
d+-) same as (c)
d-) the macro uses python3 specific things
e+) the new fancy macros are there
e-) the other macros from there (actually pyproject related) are not required
for this
e-) not always present with pytest nor python3-devel
Hence, I'd go with (c) python3-rpm-macros.
--
Miro Hrončok
--
Phone: +420777974800
IRC: mhroncok
___
python-devel mailing list -- python-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to python-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/python-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
