Hi,
I am comparing nose, py.test and zope.testing, and I realized
zope.testing does not install a console script at
Python level.
it is not really a problem when working with a buildout-centric
approach (thanks to zc.recipe.testrunner),
but how can zope.testing be used with plain Python package ?
Previously Tarek Ziadé wrote:
> I am comparing nose, py.test and zope.testing, and I realized
> zope.testing does not install a console script at
> Python level.
>
> it is not really a problem when working with a buildout-centric
> approach (thanks to zc.recipe.testrunner),
> but how can zope.test
On Thu, May 15, 2008 at 01:43:05PM +0200, Wichert Akkerman wrote:
> Previously Tarek Ziadé wrote:
> > I am comparing nose, py.test and zope.testing, and I realized
> > zope.testing does not install a console script at
> > Python level.
> >
> > it is not really a problem when working with a buildou
Tarek Ziadé wrote:
Hi,
I am comparing nose, py.test and zope.testing, and I realized
zope.testing does not install a console script at
Python level.
it is not really a problem when working with a buildout-centric
approach (thanks to zc.recipe.testrunner),
but how can zope.testing be used with
On Thu, May 15, 2008 at 2:10 PM, Christian Theune <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, May 15, 2008 at 01:43:05PM +0200, Wichert Akkerman wrote:
>> Previously Tarek Ziadé wrote:
>> > I am comparing nose, py.test and zope.testing, and I realized
>> > zope.testing does not install a console script at
Phillip:
> I suppose having it called 'test' (which is our convention) is a bit
> arrogant. But calling it 'zope.testrunner' creates the allusion >that the
> package is called zope.testrunner as well. How about 'run-zope.testing' or
> something along those lines?
Chris McDonough <[EMAIL PROTECT
On Thu, May 15, 2008 at 7:43 AM, Wichert Akkerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Is there a reason to advocate zope.testing over the others? Would it
> perhaps make more sense to use one of the more widely used tools instead
> of maintaing our own testing toolkit?
I'd also like for us to adopt one o
Hi,
On Thu, May 15, 2008 at 02:19:17PM +0200, Tarek Ziadé wrote:
> On Thu, May 15, 2008 at 2:10 PM, Christian Theune <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Thu, May 15, 2008 at 01:43:05PM +0200, Wichert Akkerman wrote:
> >> Previously Tarek Ziadé wrote:
> >> > I am comparing nose, py.test and zope.test
On May 15, 2008, at 7:00 AM, Tarek Ziadé wrote:
I am comparing nose, py.test and zope.testing, and I realized
zope.testing does not install a console script at
Python level.
That's a bug.
If nothing exists, I would like to suggest adding a setuptools console
entry point in zope.testing setu
On Thu, May 15, 2008 at 08:32:28AM -0400, Benji York wrote:
> On Thu, May 15, 2008 at 7:43 AM, Wichert Akkerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Is there a reason to advocate zope.testing over the others? Would it
> > perhaps make more sense to use one of the more widely used tools instead
> > of mai
On Fri, May 16, 2008 at 1:31 PM, Christian Theune <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, May 15, 2008 at 08:32:28AM -0400, Benji York wrote:
> > On Thu, May 15, 2008 at 7:43 AM, Wichert Akkerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> > > Is there a reason to advocate zope.testing over the others? Would it
>
11 matches
Mail list logo
