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 maintaing our own testing toolkit? > > I'd also like for us to adopt one of the more widely used test > runners, but as mentioned in replies, there are some features in > zope.testing that we depend on. If someone were adequately motivated > and had sufficient time (neither of which I have, so I suspect no one > else does either), it would be interesting to attempt to endue another > test runner with the features we need (layers, etc.).
I like our test runner and spent time refactoring it so we can actually start making changes again. I looked at other test runners (nose, py.test) and didn't find anything compelling (to me) that we didn't already have. Christian -- Christian Theune · [EMAIL PROTECTED] gocept gmbh & co. kg · forsterstraße 29 · 06112 halle (saale) · germany http://gocept.com · tel +49 345 1229889 7 · fax +49 345 1229889 1 Zope and Plone consulting and development _______________________________________________ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )