Open Stack

On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 4:49 PM, Mark McLoughlin <markmc at redhat.com> wrote:

> On Tue, 2013-11-12 at 16:42 -0500, Chuck Short wrote:
> >
> > Hi
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 4:24 PM, Mark McLoughlin <markmc at redhat.com>
> > wrote:
> >         On Tue, 2013-11-12 at 13:11 -0800, Shawn Hartsock wrote:
> >         > Maybe we should have some 60% rule... that is: If you change
> >         more than
> >         > half of a test... you should *probably* rewrite the test in
> >         Mock.
> >
> >
> >         A rule needs a reasoning attached to it :)
> >
> >         Why do we want people to use mock?
> >
> >         Is it really for Python3? If so, I assume that means we've
> >         ruled out the
> >         python3 port of mox? (Ok by me, but would be good to hear why)
> >         And, if
> >         that's the case, then we should encourage whoever wants to
> >         port mox
> >         based tests to mock.
> >
> >
> >
> > The upstream maintainer is not going to port mox to python3 so we have
> > a fork of mox called mox3. Ideally, we would drop the usage of mox in
> > favour of mock so we don't have to carry a forked mox.
>
> Isn't that the opposite conclusion you came to here:
>
> http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2013-July/012474.html
>
> i.e. using mox3 results in less code churn?
>
> Mark.
>
>
>
Yes that was my original position but I though we agreed in thread (further
on) that we would use mox3 and then migrate to mock further on.

Regards
chuck
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20131112/960f3cd3/attachment.html>