replace the concept of mark/keyword expressions with something solid/matching #6177
Labels
status: help wanted
developers would like help from experts on this topic
topic: selection
related to test selection from the command line
type: enhancement
new feature or API change, should be merged into features branch
Comments
RonnyPfannschmidt
added
type: enhancement
uqs
pushed a commit
to freebsd/freebsd-ports
that referenced
this issue
Jan 13, 2020
This package installs its 'tests' module into a non-package-specific
location in the root site-packages directory. Python packages should/usually
address this by excluding tests from installation using
setup.py: find_packages(exclude[ "<package-glob>" ]).
Unfortunately the above 'simple' change cannot be used because it doesn't
allow the package to be tested on Python 3.x, as the tests package is not
processed by 2to3, and the tests need to be run on the processed (by 2to3)
sources. This may be the original reason upstream didn't remove them from
the build, not grokking the ramifications.
Accordingly, this change moves the tests into the main package namespace
and runs the tests on the processed sources in the resulting build/*
directory. Remove CONFLICTS_INSTALL (to py-suds) accordingly.
While I'm here:
Patch the tests to support pytest > 4 and hack around the
inability to reference parametrized tests (test[foo]) in pytests -k
expressions. [1][2]
Level up ports compliance: LICENSE_FILE, USE{S} ordering, match COMMENT
to setup.py:description, match pkg-descr WWW URL to setup.py:homepage
QA: All tests pass on Python 2.7-3.8
[1] pytest-dev/pytest#5881
[2] pytest-dev/pytest#6177
PR: 226077
Reported by: yuri [1]
Approved by: portmgr (blanket: ports compliance)
MFH: 2020Q1 (blanket: ports compliance, port bugfixes)
git-svn-id: svn+ssh://svn.freebsd.org/ports/head@522860 35697150-7ecd-e111-bb59-0022644237b5
uqs
pushed a commit
to freebsd/freebsd-ports
that referenced
this issue
Jan 13, 2020
This package installs its 'tests' module into a non-package-specific
location in the root site-packages directory. Python packages should/usually
address this by excluding tests from installation using
setup.py: find_packages(exclude[ "<package-glob>" ]).
Unfortunately the above 'simple' change cannot be used because it doesn't
allow the package to be tested on Python 3.x, as the tests package is not
processed by 2to3, and the tests need to be run on the processed (by 2to3)
sources. This may be the original reason upstream didn't remove them from
the build, not grokking the ramifications.
Accordingly, this change moves the tests into the main package namespace
and runs the tests on the processed sources in the resulting build/*
directory. Remove CONFLICTS_INSTALL (to py-suds) accordingly.
While I'm here:
Patch the tests to support pytest > 4 and hack around the
inability to reference parametrized tests (test[foo]) in pytests -k
expressions. [1][2]
Level up ports compliance: LICENSE_FILE, USE{S} ordering, match COMMENT
to setup.py:description, match pkg-descr WWW URL to setup.py:homepage
QA: All tests pass on Python 2.7-3.8
[1] pytest-dev/pytest#5881
[2] pytest-dev/pytest#6177
PR: 226077
Reported by: yuri [1]
Approved by: portmgr (blanket: ports compliance)
MFH: 2020Q1 (blanket: ports compliance, port bugfixes)
uqs
pushed a commit
to freebsd/freebsd-ports
that referenced
this issue
Jan 13, 2020
net/py-suds-jurko: Fix tests installed into shared location [1]
This package installs its 'tests' module into a non-package-specific
location in the root site-packages directory. Python packages should/usually
address this by excluding tests from installation using
setup.py: find_packages(exclude[ "<package-glob>" ]).
Unfortunately the above 'simple' change cannot be used because it doesn't
allow the package to be tested on Python 3.x, as the tests package is not
processed by 2to3, and the tests need to be run on the processed (by 2to3)
sources. This may be the original reason upstream didn't remove them from
the build, not grokking the ramifications.
Accordingly, this change moves the tests into the main package namespace
and runs the tests on the processed sources in the resulting build/*
directory. Remove CONFLICTS_INSTALL (to py-suds) accordingly.
While I'm here:
Patch the tests to support pytest > 4 and hack around the
inability to reference parametrized tests (test[foo]) in pytests -k
expressions. [1][2]
Level up ports compliance: LICENSE_FILE, USE{S} ordering, match COMMENT
to setup.py:description, match pkg-descr WWW URL to setup.py:homepage
QA: All tests pass on Python 2.7-3.8
[1] pytest-dev/pytest#5881
[2] pytest-dev/pytest#6177
PR: 226077
Reported by: yuri [1]
Approved by: portmgr (blanket: ports compliance)
net/py-suds-jurko: Bump PORTREVISION missed in ports r522860
PR: 226077
Approved by: ports-secteam (blanket(s): ports compliance, port bugfixes)
Jehops
pushed a commit
to Jehops/freebsd-ports-legacy
that referenced
this issue
Jan 13, 2020
This package installs its 'tests' module into a non-package-specific
location in the root site-packages directory. Python packages should/usually
address this by excluding tests from installation using
setup.py: find_packages(exclude[ "<package-glob>" ]).
Unfortunately the above 'simple' change cannot be used because it doesn't
allow the package to be tested on Python 3.x, as the tests package is not
processed by 2to3, and the tests need to be run on the processed (by 2to3)
sources. This may be the original reason upstream didn't remove them from
the build, not grokking the ramifications.
Accordingly, this change moves the tests into the main package namespace
and runs the tests on the processed sources in the resulting build/*
directory. Remove CONFLICTS_INSTALL (to py-suds) accordingly.
While I'm here:
Patch the tests to support pytest > 4 and hack around the
inability to reference parametrized tests (test[foo]) in pytests -k
expressions. [1][2]
Level up ports compliance: LICENSE_FILE, USE{S} ordering, match COMMENT
to setup.py:description, match pkg-descr WWW URL to setup.py:homepage
QA: All tests pass on Python 2.7-3.8
[1] pytest-dev/pytest#5881
[2] pytest-dev/pytest#6177
PR: 226077
Reported by: yuri [1]
Approved by: portmgr (blanket: ports compliance)
MFH: 2020Q1 (blanket: ports compliance, port bugfixes)
git-svn-id: svn+ssh://svn.freebsd.org/ports/head@522860 35697150-7ecd-e111-bb59-0022644237b5
Zac-HD
added
status: help wanted
uqs
pushed a commit
to freebsd/freebsd-ports
that referenced
this issue
Apr 1, 2021
net/py-suds-jurko: Fix tests installed into shared location [1]
This package installs its 'tests' module into a non-package-specific
location in the root site-packages directory. Python packages should/usually
address this by excluding tests from installation using
setup.py: find_packages(exclude[ "<package-glob>" ]).
Unfortunately the above 'simple' change cannot be used because it doesn't
allow the package to be tested on Python 3.x, as the tests package is not
processed by 2to3, and the tests need to be run on the processed (by 2to3)
sources. This may be the original reason upstream didn't remove them from
the build, not grokking the ramifications.
Accordingly, this change moves the tests into the main package namespace
and runs the tests on the processed sources in the resulting build/*
directory. Remove CONFLICTS_INSTALL (to py-suds) accordingly.
While I'm here:
Patch the tests to support pytest > 4 and hack around the
inability to reference parametrized tests (test[foo]) in pytests -k
expressions. [1][2]
Level up ports compliance: LICENSE_FILE, USE{S} ordering, match COMMENT
to setup.py:description, match pkg-descr WWW URL to setup.py:homepage
QA: All tests pass on Python 2.7-3.8
[1] pytest-dev/pytest#5881
[2] pytest-dev/pytest#6177
PR: 226077
Reported by: yuri [1]
Approved by: portmgr (blanket: ports compliance)
net/py-suds-jurko: Bump PORTREVISION missed in ports r522860
PR: 226077
Approved by: ports-secteam (blanket(s): ports compliance, port bugfixes)
|
closing as solved by #7122 |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
follow-up to #5881
the fact that
pytest -k "(lambda: locals)()()['test_method[True]'] or test_other"is a "reasonable" workaround with the current system is pretty indicative how bad it actually is
unfortunately its not clear what language would be a good fit for filtering/selection
lets put some examples into this issue, ideally wee could use something similar to jpath/xpath jq
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: