I'm -0 for freezegun, +0 for unittest. I see unittest as a polyfill that we'll only need to keep around for about 3 years, and I like the "nudging people to use python3"
Freezegun is a less popular, less established library, and I'd personally still rather see it be an optional dependency. I think pip helps a lot with dependencies, but I don't think it solves all problems. It would still be great to run and test django without needing to use a virtual environment (even if only on the latest version of python). (But, as always, I'm not the one writing the tests :) Collin On Friday, November 28, 2014 12:36:27 PM UTC-5, Jannis Leidel wrote: > > > > On 28 Nov 2014, at 02:42, Tim Graham <[email protected] <javascript:>> > wrote: > > > > There have been some proposals to add new dependencies in Django's test > suite: > > > > 1. #23289 - unittest.mock (included in Python 3.3+; a backport version > would need be installed when testing on Python 2.7 and 3.2) > > 2. #23792 - freezegun (to freeze time.time() and fix some > non-deterministic tests, rather than create our own "poor freezegun" > utility in django.test) > > > > Our current policy is that all test dependencies are optional and if > they aren't installed, the test is skipped. I'd like to think that Python > packaging is mature enough that we could consider adding some "hard > dependencies" like the above (and perhaps removing the existing skip > requirement entirely) such that runtests.py would thrown an error if it > doesn't find any required dependencies rather than continue down the path > of skipping tests which can be tedious. We have the test dependencies in > requirements files (see tests/requirements) so installing the dependencies > is fairly painless using pip. > > > > While I know the idea that you can simply clone Django and run the tests > straight away is appealing, I believe the fact that Python 3.4 includes pip > and virtualenv should allow us to move forward here. If this nudges people > to contribute to Django using Python 3 in their local environment, I'd > consider that a win. If the Django Girls tutorial can use Python 3 (albeit > with the help of a coach), I'd think Django's contributing docs could take > this approach as well. > > > > What do you think? > > +1 on assuming pip or another installer for running the Django tests. > > Providing a requirements file for the tests is even more awesome, but > let's say no to VCS requirements and always require the dependencies to be > hosted on PyPI. > > Jannis -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django developers (Contributions to Django itself)" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/6d91dcda-2461-4e1b-a6ba-4dcf57725054%40googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
