Issue935

Title use pytest for testing standard configurations
Priority wish Status resolved
Superseder Nosy List jendrik, malte, silvan
Assigned To jendrik Keywords
Optional summary

Created on 2019-10-10.00:22:37 by jendrik, last changed by jendrik.

Messages
msg9018 (view) Author: jendrik Date: 2019-10-16.14:05:11
Merged.
msg9009 (view) Author: jendrik Date: 2019-10-10.14:37:07
I took care of your comments and added a changelog entry. The only Python development dependency is tox now. It installs flake8 and pytest automatically in virtual environments. (I see now that there is no changelog entry for tox, issue930. I'll add one in the default branch.)
msg9008 (view) Author: silvan Date: 2019-10-10.13:41:17
Adding Malte's comment as a change note:

I left a few small comments. Does this introduce new developer dependencies that we need to document? Perhaps not, because we already use pytest for other things?

Please add a changelog entry. Running tests is not so esoteric that we would hide this from the users.
msg9007 (view) Author: jendrik Date: 2019-10-10.00:26:50
Pull request: https://bitbucket.org/jendrikseipp/downward/pull-requests/143
msg9006 (view) Author: jendrik Date: 2019-10-10.00:22:37
We currently use a plain Python script to test that some standard configs successfully find a plan for a simple miconic task. Since we test a lot of configurations, the volume of output to stdout can become an annoyance, especially when trying to inspect it online for the Bitbucket Pipelines. Therefore, I'd like to use pytest to run the tests, which only shows stdout and stderr output for failing tests, making it easier to see where something went wrong.
History
Date User Action Args
2019-10-16 14:05:11jendriksetstatus: reviewing -> resolved
messages: + msg9018
2019-10-10 14:37:07jendriksetmessages: + msg9009
2019-10-10 13:41:17silvansetmessages: + msg9008
summary: I left a few small comments. Does this introduce new developer dependencies that we need to document? Perhaps not, because we already use pytest for other things? Please add a changelog entry. Running tests is not so esoteric that we would hide this from the users. ->
2019-10-10 13:40:58silvansetnosy: + silvan
2019-10-10 12:30:35maltesetsummary: I left a few small comments. Does this introduce new developer dependencies that we need to document? Perhaps not, because we already use pytest for other things? Please add a changelog entry. Running tests is not so esoteric that we would hide this from the users.
2019-10-10 00:26:50jendriksetstatus: unread -> reviewing
messages: + msg9007
2019-10-10 00:22:37jendrikcreate