Hi, first of all: Barry, Yaroslav don't hijack threads :) this is about numpy problems, and mixing messages about a possible, future, common testing platform only generates a bit of confusion. Don't get me wrong, it's an interesting topic, only discussed in the wrong thread.
On Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 23:56, Yaroslav Halchenko <deb...@onerussian.com> wrote: > Hi Barry, > > While it is hot: > > On Thu, 22 Jul 2010, Barry Warsaw wrote: >> In my copious spare time <wink>, I'm working on code, documentation, and >> infrastructure to make this the preferred way of testing Python modules and >> applications. You don't *have* to conform, but we'll put out big carrots for >> you if you do. > > do you have somewhere any documentation available on this infrastructure > so we could point upstreams to follow? are you recommending nose > as the testing framework? anyhow, since I'm at it: please don't force ANY testing tool; I kinda like unittest2, and it's available in python2.7 stdlib, and it's also backported to 2.4-2.6 (and even packaged for debian), and I don't want to be forced to use nose for my upstream development. Regards, -- Sandro Tosi (aka morph, morpheus, matrixhasu) My website: http://matrixhasu.altervista.org/ Me at Debian: http://wiki.debian.org/SandroTosi -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-python-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/aanlktin2om-zf+4ezponmfolo0ufcstmfy5sb9ruf...@mail.gmail.com
