Message181792
| Author | pitrou |
|---|---|
| Recipients | Arfrever, Julian, Yaroslav.Halchenko, abingham, bfroehle, borja.ruiz, brett.cannon, brian.curtin, chris.jerdonek, eric.araujo, eric.snow, exarkun, ezio.melotti, fperez, hpk, michael.foord, nchauvat, ncoghlan, pitrou, r.david.murray, santoso.wijaya, serhiy.storchaka, spiv |
| Date | 2013-02-10.11:57:54 |
| SpamBayes Score | -1.0 |
| Marked as misclassified | Yes |
| Message-id | <1360497287.3470.8.camel@localhost.localdomain> |
| In-reply-to | <1360496785.47.0.848210222048.issue16997@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| Content | |
|---|---|
> Subtests break the current unittest api of suite.countTests() and I > fear they will also break tools that use the existing test result api > to generate junit xml for continuous integration. It depends how you define countTests(). sub-tests, as the name implies, are not independent test cases. As for breaking tools, I don't really understand what's special about junit xml. Why would a subtest failure be different from a test failure in that regard? |
|
| History | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Date | User | Action | Args |
| 2013-02-10 11:57:54 | pitrou | set | recipients: + pitrou, brett.cannon, spiv, exarkun, ncoghlan, ezio.melotti, eric.araujo, Arfrever, r.david.murray, michael.foord, brian.curtin, hpk, fperez, chris.jerdonek, Yaroslav.Halchenko, santoso.wijaya, nchauvat, Julian, abingham, eric.snow, serhiy.storchaka, borja.ruiz, bfroehle |
| 2013-02-10 11:57:54 | pitrou | link | issue16997 messages |
| 2013-02-10 11:57:54 | pitrou | create | |