[openstack-dev] [Fuel] py.test vs testrepository

Thomas Goirand zigo at debian.org
Tue Oct 6 23:01:05 UTC 2015


On 10/06/2015 01:14 PM, Yuriy Taraday wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 5, 2015 at 5:40 PM Roman Prykhodchenko <me at romcheg.me
> <mailto:me at romcheg.me>> wrote:
> 
>     Atm I have the following pros. and cons. regarding testrepository:
> 
>     pros.:
> 
>     1. It’s ”standard" in OpenStack so using it gives Fuel more karma
>     and moves it more under big tent
> 
> 
> I don't think that big tent model aims at eliminating diversity of tools
> we use in our projects. A collection of web frameworks used in big tent
> is an example of that.

>From the downstream distro point of view, I don't agree in general, and
with the web framework in particular. (though it's less a concern for
the testr vs pbr). We keep adding dependencies and duplicates, but never
remove them. For example, tablib and suds/sudsjurko need to be removed
because they are not maintainable, there's not much work to do so, but
nobody does the work...

>     2. It’s in global requirements, so it doesn’t cause dependency hell
> 
> That can be solved by adding py.test to openstack/requirements.

I'd very much prefer if we could raise the barrier for getting a 3rd
party new dependency in. I hope we can talk about this in Tokyo. That
being said, indeed, adding py.test isn't so much of a problem, as it is
widely used, already packaged, and maintained upstream. I'd still prefer
if all projects were using the same testing framework and test runner
though.

Cheers,

Thomas Goirand (zigo)




More information about the OpenStack-dev mailing list