Message351745
| Author | rhettinger |
|---|---|
| Recipients | Julian, Mariatta, brett.cannon, chris.jerdonek, daniel.urban, eric.araujo, ezio.melotti, martin.panter, michael.foord, pablomouzo, parkouss, pitrou, r.david.murray, rbcollins, rhettinger, ta1hia |
| Date | 2019-09-10.22:23:22 |
| SpamBayes Score | -1.0 |
| Marked as misclassified | Yes |
| Message-id | <1568154202.9.0.25693060676.issue11664@roundup.psfhosted.org> |
| In-reply-to |
| Content | |
|---|---|
-1 I think mocking should be kept orthogonal to the unittest module. A person is free to use mocking with different testing tools like py.test or nose. Likewise, they are free to use a different mocking/patching tool than our standard library mock. In my mind, they are separate tools that should remain loosely coupled and should not cross-import one another. |
|
| History | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Date | User | Action | Args |
| 2019-09-10 22:23:22 | rhettinger | set | recipients: + rhettinger, brett.cannon, pitrou, rbcollins, ezio.melotti, eric.araujo, r.david.murray, michael.foord, pablomouzo, daniel.urban, chris.jerdonek, Julian, martin.panter, parkouss, Mariatta, ta1hia |
| 2019-09-10 22:23:22 | rhettinger | set | messageid: <1568154202.9.0.25693060676.issue11664@roundup.psfhosted.org> |
| 2019-09-10 22:23:22 | rhettinger | link | issue11664 messages |
| 2019-09-10 22:23:22 | rhettinger | create | |