Hi Thomas, On Sun, Nov 02, 2014 at 04:20:19AM +0800, Thomas Goirand wrote: > On 11/01/2014 07:58 PM, Guido Günther wrote: > > Is this going to be part of the package description? > > Yes. > > > It looks more > > like a rant about what Nose already provides than what > > python-nose-parameterized has to offer: > > > >> Nose. It's got test generators. But they kind of suck: > >> * They often require a second function > >> * They make it difficult to separate the data from the test > >> * They don't work with subclases of unittest.TestCase > >> * kwargs? What kwargs? > > > > It be much nicer if the description would highlight what > > python-nose-parameterized actually does (i.e. what the decorators are > > useful for). > > Obviously, nose-parameterized addresses these issues... > > I welcome you to provide a better package description. If upstream > doesn't take the time to write a better one, well sorry, but I don't
Following this reasoning we shouldn't patch any bugs in software either just because upstream didn't take the time. The whole distribution idea falls apart with that reasoning. > really have the time either, I just packaged that one because I needed > python-nose-timer to get in, and it depends on it (and I need nose-timer > to package Fuel). If you do have the time, then great! I'll be happy to > integrate a better package description on the next upload. nose-parameterized is a decorator for parameterized testing of Python code with nose. . The provided decorators make it simple to pass lists, iterables, tuples or callables to the test functions. This allows you to separate the data from the test without having to subclass unittest.testcase. Cheers, -- Guido -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-wnpp-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20141102114839.ga3...@bogon.m.sigxcpu.org
